EPYC 7532 vs Xeon 5148
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7532 outperforms Xeon 5148 by a whopping 5421% 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 | 3091 | 194 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.05 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.55 | 6.11 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Woodcrest (2006) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | June 2006 (19 years ago) | 19 February 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $9 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon 5148 and EPYC 7532 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.33 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 24 |
| L1 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 16 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon 5148 and EPYC 7532 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 | no data |
| Socket | 771 | Socket SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 5148 and EPYC 7532. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 5148 and EPYC 7532 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon 5148 and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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 | 0.52 | 28.71 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 32 |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 200 Watt |
Xeon 5148 has 400% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has a 5421.2% higher aggregate performance score, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7532 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon 5148 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.
