EPYC 7543 vs Xeon W-3235

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3235
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 180 Watt
16.10
EPYC 7543
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 225 Watt
38.34
+138%

EPYC 7543 outperforms Xeon W-3235 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking41776
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.428.04
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon WAMD EPYC
Power efficiency8.4616.12
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)15 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,398$3,761

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon W-3235 has 117% better value for money than EPYC 7543.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads2464
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier3328
L1 cache768 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache12 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache19.25 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm+
Die sizeno data8x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543 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)2
SocketFCLGA3647SP3
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt225 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® 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
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543 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 W-3235 and EPYC 7543 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 W-3235 and EPYC 7543. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size1 TB4 TiB
Max memory channels6no data
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s204.795 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes64128

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-3235 16.10
EPYC 7543 38.34
+138%

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-3235 25578
EPYC 7543 60901
+138%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.10 38.34
Recency 3 June 2019 15 March 2021
Physical cores 12 32
Threads 24 64
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 225 Watt

Xeon W-3235 has 25% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7543, on the other hand, has a 138.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7543 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3235 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3235 and EPYC 7543, 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-3235
Xeon W-3235
AMD EPYC 7543
EPYC 7543

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.


4.2 22 votes

Rate Xeon W-3235 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 6 votes

Rate EPYC 7543 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3235 or EPYC 7543, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.