Xeon Platinum 8368Q vs EPYC 7662

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7662
2020
64 cores / 128 threads, 225 Watt
46.38
+54.9%
Xeon Platinum 8368Q
2021
38 cores / 76 threads, 270 Watt
29.95

EPYC 7662 outperforms Xeon Platinum 8368Q by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking43147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency19.1510.30
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Ice Lake-SP (2021)
Release date19 February 2020 (4 years ago)6 April 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q 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 cores64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)38
Threads12876
Base clock speed2 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache4 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache32 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB57 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm10 nm
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data85 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q 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)225 Watt270 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q. 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-+
Precision Boost 2+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q 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 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q 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 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size4 TiB6 TB
Max memory channels88
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q.

PCIe versionno data4.0
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 7662 46.38
+54.9%
Xeon Platinum 8368Q 29.95

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 7662 72298
+54.9%
Xeon Platinum 8368Q 46681

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 46.38 29.95
Recency 19 February 2020 6 April 2021
Physical cores 64 38
Threads 128 76
Chip lithography 7 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 270 Watt

EPYC 7662 has a 54.9% higher aggregate performance score, 68.4% more physical cores and 68.4% more threads, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

Xeon Platinum 8368Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The EPYC 7662 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Platinum 8368Q in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7662 and Xeon Platinum 8368Q, 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 7662
EPYC 7662
Intel Xeon Platinum 8368Q
Xeon Platinum 8368Q

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.


5 9 votes

Rate EPYC 7662 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Xeon Platinum 8368Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7662 or Xeon Platinum 8368Q, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.