Xeon w7-2575X vs N200
Aggregate performance score
Xeon w7-2575X outperforms N200 by a whopping 1108% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing N200 and Xeon w7-2575X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1611 | 74 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 69.51 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Power efficiency | 50.21 | 14.56 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 January 2023 (1 year ago) | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,689 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
N200 and Xeon w7-2575X 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 | no data | 22 (Docosa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 44 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB Intel® Smart Cache | 45 MB |
| Chip lithography | Intel 7 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 76 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on N200 and Xeon w7-2575X 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 | FCBGA1264 | FCLGA4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 250 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
N200 and Xeon w7-2575X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200, DDR5-4800, LPDDR5-4800 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | 2 TB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 4 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 750 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 32 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of N200 and Xeon w7-2575X integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2160@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096 x 2160@60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by N200 and Xeon w7-2575X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 9 | 64 |
| USB revision | 2.0/3.2 | no data |
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 | 3.20 | 38.66 |
| Recency | 1 January 2023 | 24 August 2024 |
| Threads | 4 | 44 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 250 Watt |
N200 has 4066.7% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-2575X, on the other hand, has a 1108.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 1000% more threads.
The Xeon w7-2575X is our recommended choice as it beats the N200 in performance tests.
Be aware that N200 is a notebook processor while Xeon w7-2575X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between N200 and Xeon w7-2575X, 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.
