Xeon 638 vs EPYC 7F52
Aggregate performance score
Xeon 638 outperforms EPYC 7F52 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 311 | 185 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.60 | 22.91 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.14 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2019−2020) | Granite Rapids (2024−2026) |
| Release date | 14 April 2020 (6 years ago) | 2 February 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,100 | $899 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon 638 has 781% better value for money than EPYC 7F52.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638: 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 16 |
| Threads | 32 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 0 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 1 MB | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 72 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | Intel 3 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | 598 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 76 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP3 | FCLGA4710 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR5(6400MT/s) |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | 2 TB |
| Max memory channels | 8 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F52 and Xeon 638.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 80 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 23.67 | 32.16 |
| Recency | 14 April 2020 | 2 February 2026 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 180 Watt |
Xeon 638 has a 36% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and 33% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon 638 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD EPYC 7F52 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
