Xeon w9-3575X vs Opteron 148

Primary details

Comparing Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated30
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data34.04
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiencyno data14.48
Architecture codenameSledgeHammer (2003−2005)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date2 August 2005 (19 years ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,789

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X 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 cores1 (Single-Core)44
Threads188
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB97.5 MB
Chip lithography130 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size115 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data79 °C
Number of transistors114 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X 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 configuration11
Socket939FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt340 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data112

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

Opteron 148 392
Xeon w9-3575X 82624
+20978%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 August 2005 24 August 2024
Physical cores 1 44
Threads 1 88
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 340 Watt

Opteron 148 has 300% lower power consumption.

Xeon w9-3575X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 19 years, and 4300% more physical cores and 8700% more threads.

We couldn't decide between Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 148 and Xeon w9-3575X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Opteron 148
Opteron 148
Intel Xeon w9-3575X
Xeon w9-3575X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Opteron 148 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w9-3575X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Opteron 148 or Xeon w9-3575X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.