Xeon W-1290E vs EPYC 9655P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9655P outperforms Xeon W-1290E by a whopping 748% 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 | 1 | 705 |
| Place by popularity | 3 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.69 | 34.11 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 23.95 | 11.89 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Turin (2024) | Comet Lake (2020) |
| Release date | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) | 13 May 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $10,811 | $552 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon W-1290E has 1168% better value for money than EPYC 9655P.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E 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 | 96 | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 192 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 384 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 12x 70.6 mm2 | 206 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 70 °C |
| Number of transistors | 99,780 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E 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 | 1 |
| Socket | SP5 | 1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 400 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E 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 9655P and Xeon W-1290E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9655P and Xeon W-1290E.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 16 |
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.
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 | 100.00 | 11.79 |
| Recency | 10 October 2024 | 13 May 2020 |
| Physical cores | 96 | 10 |
| Threads | 192 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 400 Watt | 95 Watt |
EPYC 9655P has a 748.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 860% more physical cores and 860% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
Xeon W-1290E, on the other hand, has 321.1% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 9655P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon W-1290E 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.
