Xeon Gold 5317 vs EPYC 73F3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 73F3
2021
16 cores / 32 threads, 240 Watt
28.67
+68%
Xeon Gold 5317
2021
12 cores / 24 threads, 150 Watt
17.07

EPYC 73F3 outperforms Xeon Gold 5317 by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking198446
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.40no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency4.624.40
DesignerAMDIntel
ManufacturerTSMCIntel
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Ice Lake-SP (2021)
Release date15 March 2021 (4 years ago)6 April 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,521no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads3224
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.6 GHz
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)18 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm+10 nm
Die size8x 81 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data84 °C
Number of transistors33,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317 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 configuration22
SocketSP3FCLGA4189
Power consumption (TDP)240 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4-2933
Maximum memory size4 TiB6 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidth204.795 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317.

PCIe version4.04.0
PCI Express lanes12864

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating.

EPYC 73F3 28.67
+68%
Xeon Gold 5317 17.07

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

EPYC 73F3 46103
+68%
Xeon Gold 5317 27448

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.67 17.07
Physical cores 16 12
Threads 32 24
Chip lithography 7 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 240 Watt 150 Watt

EPYC 73F3 has a 68% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon Gold 5317, on the other hand, has 60% lower power consumption.

The AMD EPYC 73F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 73F3
EPYC 73F3
Intel Xeon Gold 5317
Xeon Gold 5317

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 73F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 21 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 5317 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors EPYC 73F3 and Xeon Gold 5317, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.