Xeon w7-2565X vs Athlon XP-M 1200+
Primary details
Comparing Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 Athlon XP-M | no data |
| Architecture codename | K7 (2000−2004) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | no data | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,339 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 | 1 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Bus type | FSB | no data |
| Bus rate | 200 MT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 10 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 37.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 85 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 79 °C |
| Number of transistors | 37 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 | Socket 563 | 4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 16 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon XP-M 1200+ and Xeon w7-2565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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 Athlon XP-M 1200+ and Xeon w7-2565X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 18 |
| Threads | 1 | 36 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 16 Watt | 240 Watt |
Athlon XP-M 1200+ has 1400% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-2565X, on the other hand, has 1700% more physical cores and 3500% more threads, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Athlon XP-M 1200+ and Xeon w7-2565X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Athlon XP-M 1200+ is a notebook processor while Xeon w7-2565X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon XP-M 1200+ 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.
