Xeon D-1726 vs Phi 7210
Aggregate performance score
Xeon D-1726 outperforms Xeon Phi 7210 by a whopping 112% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1267 | 765 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Architecture codename | Knights Landing (2016) | no data |
| Release date | 20 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 1 January 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726 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 | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 256 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 32 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB (shared) | 10 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Number of transistors | 8,000 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726 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 | 3647 | FCBGA2227 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 215 Watt | 70 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Status | no data | Launched |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® SPS |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 384 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 3 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 24 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 4 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.75 | 10.08 |
| Recency | 20 June 2016 | 1 January 2022 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 6 |
| Threads | 256 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 215 Watt | 70 Watt |
Xeon Phi 7210 has 966.7% more physical cores and 2033.3% more threads.
Xeon D-1726, on the other hand, has a 112.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 207.1% lower power consumption.
The Xeon D-1726 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Phi 7210 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Phi 7210 and Xeon D-1726, 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.
