EPYC 9175F vs Xeon W-3275M

VS

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking197not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.02no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Wno data
Power efficiency11.55no data
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Turin (2024)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,453$4,256

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F 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 cores28 (Octacosa-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads5632
Base clock speed2.5 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier25no data
L1 cache1.75 MB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache28 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache38.5 MB512 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data16x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature76 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data133,040 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F 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
SocketFCLGA3647SP5
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F. 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
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F 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-3275M and EPYC 9175F 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-3275M and EPYC 9175F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5
Maximum memory size2 TBno data
Max memory channels6no data
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/sno data
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-3275M and EPYC 9175F.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes64128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 June 2019 10 October 2024
Physical cores 28 16
Threads 56 32
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 320 Watt

Xeon W-3275M has 75% more physical cores and 75% more threads, and 56.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9175F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3275M and EPYC 9175F, 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-3275M
Xeon W-3275M
AMD EPYC 9175F
EPYC 9175F

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.


3 64 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9175F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3275M or EPYC 9175F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.