Xeon Gold 5118 vs EPYC 8324P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8324P outperforms Xeon Gold 5118 by a whopping 244% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 96 | 729 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.18 | 5.69 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon Gold |
| Power efficiency | 18.91 | 9.44 |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023) | Skylake (server) (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (1 year ago) | 11 July 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,895 | $1,273 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 8324P has 202% better value for money than Xeon Gold 5118.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.65 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 23 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 768 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 16.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 4x 73 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 81 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 35,500 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118 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 | 4 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | SP6 | FCLGA3647 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, 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 |
Security technologies
EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118 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 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4-2400 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 768 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 6 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 115.212 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
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 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 48 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 37.41 | 10.89 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 11 July 2017 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 12 |
| Threads | 64 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 105 Watt |
EPYC 8324P has a 243.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon Gold 5118, on the other hand, has 71.4% lower power consumption.
The EPYC 8324P is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Gold 5118 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 8324P and Xeon Gold 5118, 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.
