Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Intel Xeon W-2145 vs AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

Intel Xeon W-2145 vs AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

tjntjn Member
edited August 9 in General

Apart from the Xeon being more power hungry, a bit older, and having a slightly lower benchmark score, these CPUs seem pretty similar on paper.

Thinking of replacing some dedi Ryzen machines I have for the Xeons - any thoughts?

Comments

  • Don't do that.

  • tjntjn Member

    @CalmDown said:
    Don't do that.

    Because....

  • @tjn said:
    Apart from the Xeon being more power hungry, a bit older, and having a slightly lower benchmark score, these CPUs seem pretty similar on paper.

    Thinking of replacing some dedi Ryzen machines I have for the Xeons - any thoughts?

    Perhaps I'm missing something, but why would you switch out a Ryzen with a slower and less cost-effective CPU?

    As for the specs, on paper a xeon might seem equal or better, but it has less cache, less memory support, and an inferior 14nm architecture to AMD's 7nm

    Thanked by 1tjn
  • AXYZEAXYZE Member

    Same exact performance. No difference.

    If you are renting servers then check other things (nvme slots, sata slots) and base your choice on that.
    Something tells me that youre talking about Hetzner btw

    Thanked by 1tjn
  • tjntjn Member

    @PineappleBox said:
    Perhaps I'm missing something, but why would you switch out a Ryzen with a slower and less cost-effective CPU?

    It's cheaper for more SSD/HDD.

    @AXYZE said:
    Something tells me that youre talking about Hetzner btw

    I am!

  • AXYZEAXYZE Member

    @PineappleBox said:
    As for the specs, on paper a xeon might seem equal or better, but it has less cache, less memory support, and an inferior 14nm architecture to AMD's 7nm

    Everything you mentioned is meaningless and doesnt tell anything about rellife performance.

    Less cache so what? What about performance of this cache, what about cache hit ratio, what about latency penalty when data is not there? AMD cpus have more cache because they their design needs them. Same story with AMD FX before - big cache while Intel had small ones. Theyre different designs. Apple CPUs dont even have L3 cache at all. Zero. Because theyre designed that way and M1 wrecks everything in mobile market.

    "Inferior 14nm architecture". These "nm" numbers are NAME of process, theres no physical dimensions behind that.
    "Compared to all other "14 nm nodes", Intel's process is the densest and considerably so, with >1.5x raw logic density."
    https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/14_nm_lithography_process

    Stop treating marketing numbers as best info about performance. Look at benchmarks (Geekbench, Passmark, gcc compile time etc.) and then you can decide which one is better. You just waste time by comparing cache sizes... Apple M1 has no L3, only L2 so based on cache size logic it should perform like Core 2 Quad.

  • AXYZEAXYZE Member

    @tjn said:

    @PineappleBox said:
    Perhaps I'm missing something, but why would you switch out a Ryzen with a slower and less cost-effective CPU?

    It's cheaper for more SSD/HDD.

    @AXYZE said:
    Something tells me that youre talking about Hetzner btw

    I am!

    You can go with Xeon then. Look at Hetzner auction servers, I already saw this CPU there at nice price week ago!

  • tjntjn Member

    I agree with a lot of what @AXYZE said, for 99% of cases/workloads, I don't think cache or nm is going to matter at all.

    Power draw and TPD maybe.

    If anyone is interested:

    AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

    Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 1299                          
    Multi Core      | 8355                          
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/16536400
    

    Intel Xeon W-2145

    Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 1240                          
    Multi Core      | 8593   
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/16536467
    
  • AXYZEAXYZE Member

    @tjn said:
    I agree with a lot of what @AXYZE said, for 99% of cases/workloads, I don't think cache or nm is going to matter at all.

    Power draw and TPD maybe.

    If anyone is interested:

    AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

    Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 1299                          
    Multi Core      | 8355                          
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/16536400
    

    Intel Xeon W-2145

    Geekbench 5 Benchmark Test:
    ---------------------------------
    Test            | Value                         
                    |                               
    Single Core     | 1240                          
    Multi Core      | 8593   
    Full Test       | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/16536467
    

    Same exact performance like I said.

    Couple of % difference in GB5 points... Background tasks / turbo boost / thermals have bigger effect on pure performance than raw performance of these chips.

    Thanked by 1tjn
  • HxxxHxxx Member
    edited August 9

    Xeon all the way.

    This culture of Ryzen for servers is like a virus. Everywhere you look people offering Ryzen servers without ECC RAM and consumer grade hw. Might as well just call it a Desktop...A desktop / consumer grade with decent network.

    In the end, on paper if is something serious, Ryzen doesn't sound as good as Xeon which is a known name in the enterprise IT business. This assuming you are doing something serious with other people involved where you have to report to upper management your recommendation on enterprise servers. You don't want to be the black sheep that get's blamed. If AMD then EPYC.

    If this is a personal project go with whatever.

    I have only seen a few Ryzen builds with ECC RAM and I have looked hard. Either the provider doesn't have Anti-DDoS or use shit RAM except the following:

    -WebNX provides Ryzen with ECC (but have to ask for the ECC RAM)
    -Worldstream seems to offer Ryzen with ECC RAM.
    -OVH = Ryzen with ECC RAM
    -Hetzner = Ryzen with ECC RAM (first tier is ECC RAM optional)
    -BuyVM - VPS with ECC RAM.

    The rest either ... don't believe on ECC or just use consumer grade stuff.

    I heard those Ryzen like to get fried when under heavy load. :D Proper build important. **Shitty speculation

  • The Xeon uses more power, so price increases due to power consumption will affect you more with the Xeon compared to the Ryzen.

    Xeons almost always have ECC RAM, whereas I've seen a lot of Ryzen servers with non-ECC RAM. Always use ECC RAM on servers.

    Thanked by 1darkimmortal
  • Ryzen all the way.

    when there's no other excuse for low single/multi core performance, high power consumption, ECC limited to server grade CPUs only, then the only argument is that its a "desktop" cpu.

    Thanked by 2seenu alilet
  • HxxxHxxx Member

    @cybertech said:
    Ryzen all the way.

    when there's no other excuse for low single/multi core performance, high power consumption, ECC limited to server grade CPUs only, then the only argument is that its a "desktop" cpu.

    EPYC all the way

    Thanked by 2cybertech alilet
  • @Hxxx said:

    @cybertech said:
    Ryzen all the way.

    when there's no other excuse for low single/multi core performance, high power consumption, ECC limited to server grade CPUs only, then the only argument is that its a "desktop" cpu.

    EPYC all the way

    ok agreed on that too

  • "Inferior 14nm architecture". These "nm" numbers are NAME of process, theres no physical dimensions behind that.

    Lol. Made my morning.

  • The max memory for Xeon W-2145 is 512 GB, while it is 128 GB for Ryzen 7 3700X. What's your current CPU utilization? If your system is not CPU-bound, you don't really need to worry about which one you choose.

    Thanked by 1tjn
  • AllesAlles Member

    If you care about efficiency stay with Ryzen, since it consumes a lot less power for the same performance level. If you care about being able to expand the server, then the Xeon would be a better choice with a higher max RAM limit and 48 pci lanes vs the 24 pci from the Ryzen, allowing to connect more storage devices.

    Thanked by 1tjn
  • ralfralf Member
    edited August 10

    @serv_ee said:
    "Inferior 14nm architecture". These "nm" numbers are NAME of process, theres no physical dimensions behind that.

    Lol. Made my morning.

    Before you judge, you might actually want to do some research. For about the last decade the claimed nm sizes have no real relationship to the sizes of anything on chip and are just marketing. The only general trend is from a given fab, smaller numbers are newer and more expensive than their bigger numbers.

  • AXYZEAXYZE Member
    edited August 11

    @serv_ee said:
    "Inferior 14nm architecture". These "nm" numbers are NAME of process, theres no physical dimensions behind that.

    Lol. Made my morning.

    Video for you : )

Sign In or Register to comment.