Xeon Gold 5218R vs W-2104

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-2104
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 120 Watt
3.46
Xeon Gold 5218R
2020
20 cores / 40 threads, 125 Watt
15.58
+350%

Xeon Gold 5218R outperforms Xeon W-2104 by a whopping 350% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1539440
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.2521.56
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WIntel Xeon Gold
Power efficiency2.7311.80
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date29 August 2017 (7 years ago)24 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$255$1,273

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 5218R has 311% better value for money than Xeon W-2104.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads440
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0DMI 3.0
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier3221
L1 cache64K (per core)1.25 MB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)20 MB
L3 cache8.25 MB (shared)27.5 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size484 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data87 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)66 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCLGA2066FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R. 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 Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access-no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE46 Bitno data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGX-no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400DDR4-2667
Maximum memory size512 GB1 TB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth76.805 GB/s128.001 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R.

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 W-2104 3.46
Xeon Gold 5218R 15.58
+350%

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 W-2104 5495
Xeon Gold 5218R 24742
+350%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.46 15.58
Recency 29 August 2017 24 February 2020
Physical cores 4 20
Threads 4 40
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 125 Watt

Xeon W-2104 has 4.2% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 5218R, on the other hand, has a 350.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 400% more physical cores and 900% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 5218R is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-2104 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-2104 and Xeon Gold 5218R, 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 W-2104
Xeon W-2104
Intel Xeon Gold 5218R
Xeon Gold 5218R

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.


4 1 vote

Rate Xeon W-2104 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 16 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-2104 or Xeon Gold 5218R, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.