EPYC 4244P vs Xeon Gold 5218

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 5218
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 125 Watt
13.63
EPYC 4244P
2024
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
17.26
+26.6%

EPYC 4244P outperforms Xeon Gold 5218 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking540364
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.7052.81
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency10.3225.13
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,273$229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 4244P has 259% better value for money than Xeon Gold 5218.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads3212
Base clock speed2.3 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier23no data
L1 cache1 MB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache16 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache22 MB32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm
Die sizeno data71 mm2
Maximum core temperature87 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data61 °C
Number of transistorsno data6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647AM5
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2667DDR5
Maximum memory size1 TBno data
Max memory channels6no data
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes4828

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.

Xeon Gold 5218 13.63
EPYC 4244P 17.26
+26.6%

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.

Xeon Gold 5218 21651
EPYC 4244P 27415
+26.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.63 17.26
Recency 2 April 2019 21 May 2024
Physical cores 16 6
Threads 32 12
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 65 Watt

Xeon Gold 5218 has 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

EPYC 4244P, on the other hand, has a 26.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 92.3% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 4244P is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Gold 5218 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 5218 and EPYC 4244P, 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.


Intel Xeon Gold 5218
Xeon Gold 5218
AMD EPYC 4244P
EPYC 4244P

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.


3.4 22 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 5218 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 5 votes

Rate EPYC 4244P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 5218 or EPYC 4244P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.