EPYC 7401P vs Xeon Gold 6148
Aggregated performance score
Xeon Gold 6148 outperforms EPYC 7401P by a minimal 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 278 | 290 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 42.33 | 34.34 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | Intel Xeon Gold | AMD EPYC |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (server) (2017−2019) | Naples (2017−2018) |
| Release date | 25 April 2017 (7 years ago) | 29 June 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,072 | $1,075 |
| Current price | $318 (0.1x MSRP) | $212 (0.2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon Gold 6148 has 23% better value for money than EPYC 7401P.
Detailed specifications
Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P 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 | 20 (Icosa-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 40 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus support | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 1.25 MB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 20 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 27.5 MB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 192 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 86 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P 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 | 4 (Multiprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA3647 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P 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 6148 and EPYC 7401P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| 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 6148 and EPYC 7401P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4 Eight-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 768 GB | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 6 | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 128.001 GB/s | 170.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 48 | 128 |
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 6148 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Xeon Gold 6148 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 2% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon Gold 6148 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 36% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon Gold 6148 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 68% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.75 | 18.46 |
| Recency | 25 April 2017 | 29 June 2017 |
| Physical cores | 20 | 24 |
| Threads | 40 | 48 |
| Cost | $3072 | $1075 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 170 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6148 and EPYC 7401P, 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.
