Xeon W-3345 vs EPYC 7532

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7532
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
33.21
+15.4%
Xeon W-3345
2021
24 cores / 48 threads, 250 Watt
28.77

EPYC 7532 outperforms Xeon W-3345 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking119156
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency15.7110.89
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Ice Lake-W (2021)
Release date19 February 2020 (4 years ago)29 July 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345 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 cores32 (Dotriaconta-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads6448
Base clock speed2.4 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz4 GHz
Bus rateno data8 GT/s
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache2 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache16 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm10 nm
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data81 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345 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 configurationno data2
SocketSocket SP3FCLGA4189
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt250 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® 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-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Precision Boost 2+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345 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 7532 and Xeon W-3345. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size4 TiB4 TB
Max memory channels88
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345.

PCIe versionno data4
PCI Express lanesno data64

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

EPYC 7532 33.21
+15.4%
Xeon W-3345 28.77

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.

EPYC 7532 52755
+15.5%
Xeon W-3345 45694

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

EPYC 7532 1130
Xeon W-3345 1460
+29.2%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

EPYC 7532 9315
Xeon W-3345 13695
+47%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.21 28.77
Recency 19 February 2020 29 July 2021
Physical cores 32 24
Threads 64 48
Chip lithography 7 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 250 Watt

EPYC 7532 has a 15.4% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

Xeon W-3345, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The EPYC 7532 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3345 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7532 and Xeon W-3345, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 7532
EPYC 7532
Intel Xeon W-3345
Xeon W-3345

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.

Community ratings

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


4.5 28 votes

Rate EPYC 7532 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4 votes

Rate Xeon W-3345 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7532 or Xeon W-3345, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.