Xeon w9-3575X vs EPYC 7552

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7552
2019
48 cores / 96 threads, 200 Watt
38.58
Xeon w9-3575X
2024
44 cores / 88 threads, 340 Watt
52.02
+34.8%

Xeon w9-3575X outperforms EPYC 7552 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking7530
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.3833.96
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency18.2614.48
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,025$3,789

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon w9-3575X has 360% better value for money than EPYC 7552.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X 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 cores48 (Octatetraconta-Core)44
Performance-coresno data44
Threads9688
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz4.8 GHz
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache96 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache192 MB (shared)97.5 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size192 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data79 °C
Number of transistors3,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketSP3FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt340 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, 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-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Precision Boost 2+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X 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 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size4 TiB4 TB
Max memory channels88
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes128112

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 7552 38.58
Xeon w9-3575X 52.02
+34.8%

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 7552 61282
Xeon w9-3575X 82624
+34.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 38.58 52.02
Recency 7 August 2019 24 August 2024
Physical cores 48 44
Threads 96 88
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 340 Watt

EPYC 7552 has 9.1% more physical cores and 9.1% more threads, and 70% lower power consumption.

Xeon w9-3575X, on the other hand, has a 34.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 years.

The Xeon w9-3575X is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7552 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7552 and Xeon w9-3575X, 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 7552
EPYC 7552
Intel Xeon w9-3575X
Xeon w9-3575X

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.


2.6 42 votes

Rate EPYC 7552 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w9-3575X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7552 or Xeon w9-3575X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.