Xeon w7-2565X vs AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR
Primary details
Comparing AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD K6-III+ | no data |
| Architecture codename | K6-III (1999−2000) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 25 September 2000 (24 years ago) | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,339 |
Detailed specifications
AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 18 (Octadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 36 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.1 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Bus type | FSB | no data |
| Bus rate | 99.99 MT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 4 | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 37.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 0.18 µm | 10 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 79 °C |
| Number of transistors | 21 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | 4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9.5 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 25 September 2000 | 24 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 18 |
| Threads | 1 | 36 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 240 Watt |
AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR has 2566.7% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-2565X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 23 years, and 1700% more physical cores and 3500% more threads.
We couldn't decide between AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR is a notebook processor while Xeon w7-2565X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between AMD-K6-IIIE+/400ICR and Xeon w7-2565X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
