Xeon Gold 5318S vs Opteron 242
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Ice Lake-SP (2021) |
| Release date | April 2003 (21 year ago) | 6 April 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 36 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 87 °C |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S 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 | 2 | 2 |
| Socket | 940 | FCLGA4189 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 165 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S. 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 | - | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-2933 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 64 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 24 |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 165 Watt |
Opteron 242 has 94.1% lower power consumption.
Xeon Gold 5318S, on the other hand, has 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 242 and Xeon Gold 5318S, 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.
