Xeon W-2102 vs Gold 6242

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6242
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 150 Watt
16.55
+419%
Xeon W-2102
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 120 Watt
3.19

Xeon Gold 6242 outperforms Xeon W-2102 by a whopping 419% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking4001614
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.685.75
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon GoldIntel Xeon W
Power efficiency10.392.50
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Skylake (server) (2017−2018)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)29 August 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,529$202

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6242 has 68% better value for money than Xeon W-2102.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads324
Base clock speed2.8 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz2.9 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0DMI 3.0
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier2829
L1 cache1 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache16 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache22 MB8.25 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data484 mm2
Maximum core temperature85 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data66 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA2066
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data46 Bit
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400
Maximum memory size1 TB512 GB
Max memory channels64
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s76.805 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4848

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 6242 16.55
+419%
Xeon W-2102 3.19

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 6242 26288
+418%
Xeon W-2102 5073

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.55 3.19
Recency 2 April 2019 29 August 2017
Physical cores 16 4
Threads 32 4
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 120 Watt

Xeon Gold 6242 has a 418.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Xeon W-2102, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.

The Xeon Gold 6242 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-2102 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6242 and Xeon W-2102, 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 6242
Xeon Gold 6242
Intel Xeon W-2102
Xeon W-2102

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.


2.2 11 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6242 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 5 votes

Rate Xeon W-2102 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6242 or Xeon W-2102, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.