Thursday, February 23rd 2023

Intel Xeon W-3400/2400 "Sapphire Rapids" Processors Run First Benchmarks

by
AleksandarK
 Discuss (46 Comments)
Thanks to the attribution of Puget Systems, we have a preview of Intel's latest Xeon W-3400 and Xeon W-2400 workstation processors based on Sapphire Rapids core technology. Delivering up to 56 cores and 112 threads, these CPUs are paired with up to eight TeraBytes of eight-channel DDR5-4800 memory. For expansion, they offer up to 112 PCIe 5.0 lanes come with up to 350 Watt TDP; some models are unlocked for overclocking. This interesting HEDT family for workstation usage comes at a premium with an MSRP of $5,889 for the top-end SKU, and motherboard prices are also on the pricey side. However, all of this should come as no surprise given the expected performance professionals expect from these chips. Puget Systems has published test results that include: Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve, Unreal Engine, Cinebench R23.2, Blender, and V-Ray. Note that Puget Systems said that: "While this post has been an interesting preview of the new Xeon processors, there is still a TON of testing we want to do. The optimizations Intel is working on is of course at the top, but there are several other topics we are highly interested in." So we expect better numbers in the future.
Below, you can see the comparison with AMD's competing Threadripper Pro HEDT SKUs, along with power usage using different Windows OS power profiles:


Power usage:
Source: Puget Systems

Related News

Add your own comment

46 Comments on Intel Xeon W-3400/2400 "Sapphire Rapids" Processors Run First Benchmarks

#1
AnotherReader
I hope these are early results. Losing to Zen 3 based Threadripper despite consuming much more power isn't a good omen. If this is a portent for future performance, then AMD might not even bother releasing Zen 4 based Threadripper for a long while.
Posted on Reply
#2
thegnome
AnotherReaderI hope these are early results. Losing to Zen 3 based Threadripper despite consuming much more power isn't a good omen. If this is a portent for future performance, then AMD might not even bother releasing Zen 4 based Threadripper for a long while.
Yup, but I suppose that's what you get when delaying products. It might have been very good on the original launch date, but nowadays with Zen 4 and such it's just too late, too slow and too power hungry. Wish Intel get back on their feet if they ever want to take the fight against AMD in the datacenter again.
Posted on Reply
#3
P4-630
Just get an affordable i9 13900K.... :D
Posted on Reply
#4
TumbleGeorge
Sapphire Rapids was first announced by Intel at their Investor Meeting in May 2019 with the intention of Sapphire Rapids succeeding Ice Lake in 2021. Wikipedia
Posted on Reply
#5
lemonadesoda
Colour me underwhelmed.

If the performance had been as-is, but with half the power consumption, it would have been a winner despite being a bit slower.

But to be slower and hot and thirsty AND EXPENSIVE? It redefines the term FLOP.
Posted on Reply
#6
Ownedtbh
nice performance, marking just the 2.place
Posted on Reply
#7
Denver
In short, it loses in practically all benchmarks for a TR based on Zen3 and still consumes more energy. Well played, intel. lol
Posted on Reply
#8
Dirt Chip
For non-3d app, 13900k is rocking it big time and for fraction of the cost.
Also, 31k for 13900k in CB23 is very low result so maybe other values are also offset.

To beat top TR, intel will probably need to exchange some P-cores with E-cores.
Going 32p+96e (160 threads, you trade 1p for 4e) or so will probably take the lead in most situations.
Posted on Reply
#9
AnotherReader
Dirt ChipTo beat top TR, intel will probably need to exchange some P-cores with E-cores.
Going 32p+96e (160 threads, you trade 1p for 4e) or so will probably take the lead in most situations.
That is not a viable solution at the moment. Going with E cores means giving up AVX-512 and any other extra instructions that P cores have. That's fine for consumers, but for a workstation, it is a non starter.

The 13900k, while an excellent desktop processor, is not suitable for many workstation tasks due to reasons unrelated to core performance:
  • limited memory capacity: a peak of 192 GiB for 13900k pales in comparison to the 256 GB of a single DDR4 RDIMM or the total of 4 TB that the new Xeons support
  • low memory bandwidth: a corollary of the first con. 2 channels vs 8 to 12 is self explanatory
  • limited IO: 20 PCIe lanes versus 120 for Threadripper and 112 for the new Xeons
Posted on Reply
#10
AnarchoPrimitiv
thegnomeYup, but I suppose that's what you get when delaying products. It might have been very good on the original launch date, but nowadays with Zen 4 and such it's just too late, too slow and too power hungry. Wish Intel get back on their feet if they ever want to take the fight against AMD in the datacenter again.
Actually, for the sake of what's best for consumers in the long term, thisbl is actually a good thing....we need AMD to get much closer to 50% marketshare in ALL x86 segments before Intel starts really fighting back....the most ideal situation is that AMD achieves 50% markershare and then Intel and AMD battle in a perpetual 50/50 stalemate...that's what would produce the most innovation and best prices.

I still think AMD will release a Zen4 Threadripper....they have to respond in some fashion, and they need an HEDT/Workstation product with the newest features like PCIe 5.0 because in that segment, such things are actually important as opposed to gaming. I'm also very interested to see what the top threadripper sku would be with respect to core count, and the frequency it'll reach....should be higher than Zen3 TR. Also, wondering how many memory channels it would have since Genoa has a 12 channel controller, would that mean TR would have 6 channel instead of 4 like last gen?
Posted on Reply
#11
ZoneDymo
jeez....I dont even see why they would release this really, sure it will sell but they know in the labs already that this underperforms right? sooo why not make it better and then release it...
Posted on Reply
#12
AnotherReader
ZoneDymojeez....I dont even see why they would release this really, sure it will sell but they know in the labs already that this underperforms right? sooo why not make it better and then release it...
It's still better than Ice Lake or Cascade Lake based Xeons.
Posted on Reply
#13
Avlin
Asus Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI II with PBO enabled... DDR4 ECC less expensive also than DDR5 RDIMM...

I dont want Hipster Cove Potator Core, 15W each
Posted on Reply
#14
Vya Domus
Dirt ChipTo beat top TR, intel will probably need to exchange some P-cores with E-cores.
Going 32p+96e (160 threads, you trade 1p for 4e) or so will probably take the lead in most situations.
Terrible idea, the e-cores are horribly underpowered, even with the highly multithreaded applications the scaling gets worse and worse with core count.
Posted on Reply
#15
Avlin
e core is about taking less silicium, not less power
Posted on Reply
#16
AnotherReader
Avline core is about taking less silicium, not less power
There aretasks for which they can have lower power too, but Intel has chosen to push the clocks beyond their sweet spot. Chips and Cheese found that:
Gracemont too is pushed past its sweet spot. To be blunt, Alder Lake’s E-Cores have no business going above 3.5 GHz. But Intel has decided to make them do exactly that, so they don’t go beyond being a performance per area play.
Posted on Reply
#17
Avlin
actually once you overclock a little bit the saphir rapids it rips off the threadripper. it will then called wattripper
Posted on Reply
#18
Wirko
AnarchoPrimitivI still think AMD will release a Zen4 Threadripper....they have to respond in some fashion, and they need an HEDT/Workstation product with the newest features like PCIe 5.0 because in that segment, such things are actually important as opposed to gaming.
For everything that isn't gaming, and doesn't need highest clocks and OC, Epyc is a good option too. I don't know about Zen 4 but looking at Zen 3, the choice of Epyc boards is better than TR boards and they're cheaper too.
Posted on Reply
#19
Daven
This would be competitive if it was 2021. But its not and 96 core Zen 4 will run circles around these Intel parts.
Posted on Reply
#20
AKBrian
Dirt ChipAlso, 31k for 13900k in CB23 is very low result so maybe other values are also offset.
They're allowing the 13900K to continually bash itself up against the thermal throttle point of their Noctua NH-U12A. They did the same thing with their 13900KS review, and seemed genuinely confused when it was beaten out by the non-KS in several MT tests, deflecting blame to software bugs.

Puget does many things right, but paying attention to thermals or power profiles is not one of them.
Posted on Reply
#21
zo0lykas
Avlinactually once you overclock a little bit the saphir rapids it rips off the threadripper. it will then called wattripper
you talk non-sense, stop smoke, or wherever you doing.. dig a bit more INFO before post crap like this
Posted on Reply
#22
Dirt Chip
Vya DomusTerrible idea, the e-cores are horribly underpowered, even with the highly multithreaded applications the scaling gets worse and worse with core count.
"horribly underpowered"?
If you take CB23 as multithreaded rendering app it dose quite well, isn't it?
Posted on Reply
#24
Vya Domus
Dirt Chip"horribly underpowered"?
If you take CB23 as multithreaded rendering app it dose quite well, isn't it?
A 13900K and 7950X score exactly the same in CB23, one has 24 cores (8+16) and the other 16, meaning an e-core is quite literally half of a Zen4 core performance wise. Seems pretty horribly underpowered to me.
Posted on Reply
#25
lemonadesoda
Maybe we need to start including Mac processors in the benchmark comparisons. I bet the M2 Pro found in the Mac mini would beat the new Xeons in Performance per core and Performance per watt.

i find the new Xeons so underwhelming I’m even considering coming out of the x86 closet.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 18th, 2024 04:45 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts