Intel Core i7-1375PRE vs Intel Xeon Gold 6334 Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests against the Intel Core i7-1375PRE. The Xeon’s margins range from 0.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core to 1.2% in R15 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Xeon Gold 6334 has an average benchmark score of 5043, while the Core i7-1375PRE scores 4985. This places the Xeon at the 60th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the i7’s 59th percentile — a difference of one percentile point.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Xeon Gold 6334 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core i7-1375PRE has 14 cores and 20 threads. Despite having fewer cores and threads, the Xeon still edges out the i7 in every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-1375PRE does not. This makes the Xeon more suitable for error-sensitive server or workstation workloads where data integrity is critical.

Q: What is the difference in memory channel support between the two?

A: The Xeon Gold 6334 features eight-channel memory support with DDR4, providing a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Core i7-1375PRE uses dual-channel memory support with DDR4 and DDR5, but its memory bandwidth is not listed in the available data.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Core i7-1375PRE includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Xeon Gold 6334 has no integrated graphics listed. This means the i7 can drive displays without a discrete GPU, whereas the Xeon requires a separate graphics card.

# Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, but the significance of those wins varies by workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1757 against the i7’s 1737, a 1.2% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 247 versus 245, a 0.8% edge. Moving to R20, the Xeon’s multi-core score of 7322 beats 7239 (1.1%), and its single-core score of 1033 beats 1021 (1.2%). In R23, the Xeon leads 17435 to 17236 in multi-core (1.2%) and 2461 to 2433 in single-core (1.2%).

The Xeon’s wins are consistent but narrow, never exceeding 1.2%. This suggests that in raw rendering throughput, the two processors are nearly interchangeable. However, the Xeon’s advantage in every test indicates a slight architectural efficiency edge despite having 6 fewer cores and 4 fewer threads.

The Core i7-1375PRE does not win a single benchmark, but its closest showing is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it trails by only 2 points (245 vs 247). This near-tie in legacy single-threaded performance hints that the i7’s higher boost clock — 4.80 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz — helps close the gap, even if it doesn’t fully overcome the Xeon’s per-core strength.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded workloads like video rendering or 3D modeling, the Xeon’s 1.2% lead in R23 multi-core is the headline number. For single-threaded tasks, the Xeon still wins, but the margin shrinks to 0.8% in R15, making the i7 a closer competitor in that specific scenario.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and target completely different market segments. The Xeon Gold 6334 is built on the Ice Lake-SP architecture, released in April 2021, and is designed for server/workstation use. The Core i7-1375PRE uses the Raptor Lake-P architecture, launched in January 2023, and is a mobile processor.

The process node for both is listed as 10 nm, and both are manufactured by Intel. However, the die size differs: the i7-1375PRE has a die size of 217 mm², while the Xeon’s die size is not listed in the data.

Cache hierarchies are notably different. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the i7 provides more cache per core and more total L3 — a potential advantage for workloads that repeatedly access the same data.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The Xeon supports DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The i7 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but uses a dual-channel memory bus, with no bandwidth figure listed. The Xeon’s eight-channel setup provides significantly more memory bandwidth, which is critical for server workloads that move large data sets.

PCIe support also differs: the Xeon has Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the i7 has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This gives the Xeon far more expansion headroom for GPUs, NVMe drives, and network cards.

ECC memory support is exclusive to the Xeon, reflecting its server positioning. The i7 includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The Xeon uses Socket 4189, while the i7 uses BGA 1744, meaning the Xeon is socketed for replaceable server boards, whereas the i7 is soldered in mobile devices.

# Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Xeon Gold 6334 | Intel Core i7-1375PRE |

|---------------|----------------------|------------------------|

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1900.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 165 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4189 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Ice Lake-SP | Raptor Lake-P |

| Generation | Xeon Gold (Ice Lake-SP) | Core i7 (Raptor Lake-P) |

| Die Size | Not listed | 217 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 64 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2021-04-05 | 2023-01-03 |

| Part Number | Not listed | SRMRK |

The base clock difference is striking: the Xeon runs at 3.60 GHz, while the i7 has a base clock of 1900.00 MHz (1.90 GHz). However, the i7 boosts to 4.80 GHz, far above the Xeon’s 3.70 GHz boost. The TDP difference is equally dramatic — 165 W for the Xeon versus 28 W for the i7 — reflecting the Xeon’s server-class power envelope and the i7’s mobile efficiency focus.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon Gold 6334, but the margins are small enough to warrant scrutiny. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1757 against the i7’s 1737, a 1.2% advantage. That 20-point gap is the largest in any test. In R15 single-core, the Xeon leads 247 to 245, a 0.8% edge — the smallest margin of all six benchmarks.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Xeon’s multi-core score of 7322 beats 7239 by 1.1%, while its single-core score of 1033 beats 1021 by 1.2%. The R23 results mirror this pattern: multi-core shows 17435 for the Xeon versus 17236 for the i7 (1.2%), and single-core shows 2461 versus 2433 (1.2%).

The consistency of the 1.2% margin across R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core suggests a stable performance differential that scales across workload types. The Xeon’s 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 3.70 GHz boost clock manages to outperform the i7’s 14-core, 20-thread setup with a 4.80 GHz boost clock. This implies that the Xeon’s Ice Lake cores deliver higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) than the Raptor Lake cores in these specific workloads, despite the i7’s frequency advantage.

The single-core results are particularly revealing. In R15, the Xeon’s 247 barely edges the i7’s 245. In R20, the gap widens to 12 points (1033 vs 1021), and in R23 it’s 28 points (2461 vs 2433). This trend suggests that as the Cinebench version becomes more demanding, the Xeon’s per-core efficiency advantage grows slightly.

For multi-core, the R15 gap of 20 points grows to 83 points in R20 and 199 points in R23. The absolute difference increases with each newer benchmark version, even though the percentage stays around 1.1–1.2%. This means that in longer, more intensive multi-threaded renders, the Xeon pulls ahead by a slightly larger absolute margin.

The i7’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-12600HE (avg score 4980, delta 0.1%), the Intel Xeon W-2150B (4992, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i3-12300HE (4995, delta -0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G (5002, delta -0.3%). The Xeon’s rivals include the Intel Core i9-9820X (5049, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i9-12900TE (5050, delta -0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE (5070, delta -0.5%), and the Intel Xeon W-2155 (5072, delta -0.6%). These rival comparisons show both processors are positioned within a tight performance band around the 5000-point average score mark.

# The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon Gold 6334 as the stronger performer in every benchmark test, but the margins are thin — never exceeding 1.2%. For users who prioritize raw Cinebench scores, the Xeon is the clear choice, delivering consistent wins across all six head-to-head tests. Its eight-channel memory bus, 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, and ECC support make it suitable for server and workstation environments where memory throughput and data integrity are paramount.

The Core i7-1375PRE, despite losing every benchmark, offers advantages that the data reveals. Its 14 cores and 20 threads provide more parallel hardware than the Xeon’s 8 cores and 16 threads, even if that doesn’t translate to a benchmark win. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache exceed the Xeon’s cache capacity, potentially benefiting workloads with high data reuse. The inclusion of Iris Xe Graphics means the i7 can operate without a discrete GPU, and its 28 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon’s 165 W, making it far more power-efficient for mobile or compact systems.

The i7 also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility for system builders, whereas the Xeon is limited to DDR4. The i7’s newer release date (January 2023 vs April 2021) indicates a more recent design, though the Xeon’s Ice Lake architecture still holds the performance edge in these tests.

Choose the Xeon Gold 6334 if your primary concern is maximum benchmark performance in a server or workstation context, especially with ECC memory requirements, high memory bandwidth, or extensive PCIe expansion needs. Choose the Core i7-1375PRE if you need integrated graphics, lower power consumption, dual memory support, or a mobile footprint — and if you can accept the 0.8–1.2% performance deficit in Cinebench workloads. The percentile rankings (60th for Xeon, 59th for i7) reinforce that both are mid-pack processors, but the Xeon sits marginally higher in the overall distribution.