Intel Core i7-3770 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6338N Comparison

The Intel Xeon Gold 6338N and the Intel Core i7-3770 represent two vastly different eras and purposes in Intel’s lineup. The Xeon Gold 6338N is a 32-core Ice Lake-SP server processor built for heavy parallel workloads, while the Core i7-3770 is a 4-core Ivy Bridge desktop chip from 2012. The benchmark data reveals a complete sweep for the Xeon, but the magnitude and nature of those wins tell a nuanced story about scaling, architecture, and workload suitability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N wins all six compared benchmarks, with every delta percentage hovering around the 556–561% range. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 3605 against the i7-3770’s 549, a 556.6% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap, with the Xeon at 509 versus 77, a 561% delta. This pattern repeats across R20 and R23, where the Xeon’s multi-core scores of 15024 and 35773 dwarf the i7-3770’s 2289 and 5450, respectively.

What is striking is the consistency of the margin. In R20 single-core, the Xeon posts 2121 versus 322, a 558.7% lead, while R23 single-core shows 5050 versus 769, a 556.7% lead. The fact that the delta is nearly identical across both single and multi-threaded tests suggests that the Xeon’s advantage is not purely core-count driven; its per-core performance is also dramatically higher. The i7-3770’s best showing is its R23 multi-core score of 5450, which is still less than one-sixth of the Xeon’s 35773. The data shows no scenario where the older chip is competitive, even in lightly threaded workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors is immense. The Xeon Gold 6338N uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture on a 10 nm process, while the i7-3770 is built on Ivy Bridge at 22 nm. The Xeon packs 32 cores and 64 threads, compared to the i7-3770’s 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies differ substantially: the Xeon offers 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 48 MB of shared L3, whereas the i7-3770 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, plus 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon’s L3 is six times larger, which is critical for server workloads with large working sets.

Memory support is another major fork. The Xeon Gold 6338N uses DDR4 over an eight-channel bus, delivering 170.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and supports ECC memory. The i7-3770 is limited to DDR3 on a dual-channel bus, with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The Xeon also offers PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-3770 has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7-3770 includes integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics, while the Xeon has none listed. The production statuses diverge too: the Xeon is Active, released in April 2021, while the i7-3770 is End-of-life, released in April 2012, with a transistor count of 1,400 million and a die size of 160 mm².

The Verdict

The data is clear: the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N is overwhelmingly superior in every measured benchmark. Its 32 cores and 64 threads provide a 556%+ lead across all Cinebench tests, and its architectural advantages—10 nm node, eight-channel DDR4, 48 MB L3, PCIe Gen 4—make it a modern server workhorse. The i7-3770, with its 4 cores and 8 threads, is a relic of the desktop Ivy Bridge era, and its scores reflect that. However, the i7-3770 does have one data point the Xeon lacks: a Geekbench multi-core score of 2705 and single-core of 816, plus a suite of PassMark scores, none of which are available for the Xeon in this dataset.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice depends entirely on workload. The Xeon is built for server or workstation tasks that demand massive parallelism, high memory bandwidth, and ECC reliability. The i7-3770, despite being slower by an order of magnitude, is a desktop part with integrated graphics and a much lower 77 W TDP versus the Xeon’s 185 W. The data does not support any scenario where the i7-3770 wins a performance comparison, but it does show that the i7-3770 has a broader benchmark footprint, including PassMark tests for data compression, encryption, and physics, which the Xeon lacks in this record.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, based solely on the FACT PACK:

• Cores: Xeon Gold 6338N has 32; i7-3770 has 4.
• Threads: Xeon Gold 6338N has 64; i7-3770 has 8.
• Base Clock: Xeon Gold 6338N is 2.20 GHz; i7-3770 is 3.40 GHz.
• Boost Clock: Xeon Gold 6338N is 3.50 GHz; i7-3770 is 3.90 GHz.
• TDP: Xeon Gold 6338N is 185 W; i7-3770 is 77 W.
• Socket: Xeon Gold 6338N uses Intel Socket 4189; i7-3770 uses Intel Socket 1155.
• Architecture: Xeon Gold 6338N is Ice Lake; i7-3770 is Ivy Bridge.
• Process Node: Xeon Gold 6338N is 10 nm; i7-3770 is 22 nm.
• Transistors: Xeon Gold 6338N has none listed; i7-3770 has 1,400 million.
• Die Size: Xeon Gold 6338N has none listed; i7-3770 is 160 mm².
• L2 Cache: Xeon Gold 6338N is 1 MB per core; i7-3770 is 256 KB per core.
• L3 Cache: Xeon Gold 6338N is 48 MB shared; i7-3770 is 8 MB shared.
• Memory Support: Xeon Gold 6338N is DDR4; i7-3770 is DDR3.
• Memory Bus: Xeon Gold 6338N is eight-channel; i7-3770 is dual-channel.
• Memory Bandwidth: Xeon Gold 6338N is 170.7 GB/s; i7-3770 is 25.6 GB/s.
• ECC Memory: Xeon Gold 6338N supports it; i7-3770 does not.
• PCIe: Xeon Gold 6338N is Gen 4, 64 Lanes; i7-3770 is Gen 3, 16 Lanes.
• Integrated Graphics: Xeon Gold 6338N has none; i7-3770 has Intel HD 4000.
• Market Segment: Xeon Gold 6338N is Server/Workstation; i7-3770 is Desktop.
• Production Status: Xeon Gold 6338N is Active; i7-3770 is End-of-life.
• Release Date: Xeon Gold 6338N is 2021-04-05; i7-3770 is 2012-04-28.
• Launch MSRP: Xeon Gold 6338N has none listed; i7-3770 is $278 (stated once).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6338N has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i7-3770 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the biggest performance margin between the two?

A: The largest delta is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon Gold 6338N leads by 561% (509 vs. 77). The smallest delta is 556.4%, found in R20 multi-core.

Q: Does the i7-3770 win any benchmark in the head-to-head data?

A: No. The Xeon Gold 6338N wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with winsA set to 6 and winsB set to 0.

Q: What memory types do they support?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N supports DDR4 over an eight-channel bus with 170.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The i7-3770 supports DDR3 over a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i7-3770 has integrated graphics, listed as Intel HD 4000. The Xeon Gold 6338N has none listed.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N is marked as Active, while the i7-3770 is marked as End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 6338N wins every benchmark where both processors have data. Its Cinebench scores are uniformly 556–561% higher, reflecting its 32-core, 64-thread configuration and 48 MB of L3 cache. The Xeon’s eight-channel DDR4 memory bus at 170.7 GB/s makes it the obvious choice for memory-bandwidth-intensive server tasks, and its ECC support and 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes further cement its position for enterprise or workstation deployments. The data shows no workload category in the head-to-head set where the i7-3770 comes out ahead.

The Intel Core i7-3770, however, has a unique set of benchmark results that the Xeon does not match in this dataset. It has Geekbench multi-core and single-core scores of 2705 and 816, respectively, and a full PassMark suite including data compression (105424), encryption (1866), extended instructions (4476), prime numbers (29), floating point math (11628), integer math (22945), multithread (6414), physics (458), random string sorting (14060), and single-thread (2073) results. None of these tests appear for the Xeon, so the i7-3770 effectively wins by default in those categories. Its 77 W TDP and integrated HD 4000 graphics also make it a low-power desktop option, though its 4 cores and 8 threads will struggle with any modern parallel workload. The verdict from the data is that the Xeon is for heavy lifting, while the i7-3770 remains a legacy part with a broader (but slower) test footprint.