Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ vs EPYC 8224P
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 160 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 29.20 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 16.76 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (1 year ago) | 10 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $855 | $5,945 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ 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 cores | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 2.55 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 60 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 2x 73 mm2 | 4x 477 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | 81 °C |
| Number of transistors | 17,750 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ 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 | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | SP6 | 4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 300 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5-4800 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 80 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 10 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 32 |
| Threads | 48 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 300 Watt |
EPYC 8224P has an age advantage of 8 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 87.5% lower power consumption.
Xeon Platinum 8462Y+, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 8224P and Xeon Platinum 8462Y+, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
