Intel Core i7-3770 vs Intel Xeon W-3175X Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-3175X and Intel Core i7-3770 occupy opposite ends of the performance spectrum. The data shows a complete sweep for the Xeon W-3175X across all head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 80.4% in single-core Geekbench to over 600% in multi-core Cinebench tests. The W-3175X is a 28-core Skylake-W workstation processor, while the i7-3770 is a 4-core Ivy Bridge desktop chip from 2012. This analysis quantifies the generational and core-count chasm between these two Intel parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Xeon W-3175X wins all 8 head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core i7-3770 records 0 wins.

Q: What is the largest performance margin between the two processors?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon W-3175X leads by 614.3%. The closest margin is in Geekbench single-core, with a lead of 80.4%.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Xeon W-3175X has 28 cores and 56 threads. The Core i7-3770 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the difference in process node and transistor count?

A: The Xeon W-3175X uses a 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors. The Core i7-3770 uses a 22 nm process with 1,400 million transistors.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type and ECC?

A: No. The Xeon W-3175X supports DDR4 with a six-channel memory bus and ECC memory. The Core i7-3770 supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and no ECC support.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Xeon W-3175X has an average benchmark score of 10,369. The Core i7-3770 has an average benchmark score of 9,706.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is fundamental. The Xeon W-3175X is built on the Skylake-W architecture using a 14 nm process, containing 8,000 million transistors on a 688 mm² die. The Core i7-3770 uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process, with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The node shrink gives the Xeon W-3175X a density advantage that is compounded by its much larger physical footprint.

Cache layouts diverge sharply. The Xeon W-3175X provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 38.5 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i7-3770 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. For memory, the Xeon W-3175X supports DDR4 across a six-channel bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Core i7-3770 uses DDR3 on a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s. The Xeon W-3175X also supports ECC memory, which the Core i7-3770 lacks.

The Xeon W-3175X has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core i7-3770 does not. The Xeon W-3175X provides 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the Core i7-3770 offers 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on the Core i7-3770 (Intel HD 4000), but the Xeon W-3175X has none. These differences reflect their market segments: Server/Workstation versus Desktop.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon W-3175X dominates every benchmark, but the margins tell a nuanced story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 3,900 versus 549 for the Core i7-3770, a 610.4% advantage. The single-core R15 result is even more lopsided in percentage terms: 550 versus 77, a 614.3% lead. This pattern repeats across Cinebench R20 and R23, where multi-core deltas are 609.9% and 609.9%, respectively, and single-core deltas are 612.4% and 610.3%.

Geekbench results show a tighter, but still decisive, gap. In Geekbench multi-core, the Xeon W-3175X scores 14,331 against 2,705 for the Core i7-3770, a 429.8% lead. The single-core Geekbench test is the closest contest: 1,472 versus 816, an 80.4% advantage for the Xeon. This smaller margin in single-threaded Geekbench suggests that while the Xeon's architectural efficiency is superior, the Core i7-3770's older Ivy Bridge design still holds up reasonably well in lightly-threaded workloads.

The multi-core deltas of roughly 600% align with the core count difference: 28 cores versus 4 cores is a 7x ratio, though the Xeon's higher base clock (3.10 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) and boost clock (4.30 GHz vs 3.90 GHz) complicate the scaling. The Xeon's additional L3 cache (38.5 MB vs 8 MB) and six-channel memory bandwidth are likely contributors to the sustained multi-core performance.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity: the Intel Xeon W-3175X is the superior processor in every measurable category in this comparison. It wins all 8 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 10,369 versus 9,706 for the Core i7-3770. The Xeon W-3175X offers 28 cores versus 4, 56 threads versus 8, and nearly five times the shared L3 cache at 38.5 MB versus 8 MB.

For workloads that scale across cores, the decision is straightforward. The Xeon W-3175X delivers 609.9% higher performance in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 429.8% higher in Geekbench multi-core. For single-threaded tasks, the Xeon still leads, but by a smaller margin: 80.4% in Geekbench single-core and 610.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Core i7-3770's only advantages are its lower TDP (77 watts versus 255 watts) and the presence of integrated graphics, neither of which affects raw benchmark scores.

The Core i7-3770, released in 2012, is end-of-life and positioned for desktop use. The Xeon W-3175X, released in 2019, targets server and workstation workloads. Based on benchmark data alone, anyone needing maximum processing throughput should choose the Xeon W-3175X. The Core i7-3770 is only relevant for legacy systems or low-power builds where its 77-watt TDP and HD 4000 graphics are priorities.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 28 (Xeon W-3175X) vs 4 (Core i7-3770)
• Threads: 56 vs 8
• Base Clock: 3.10 GHz vs 3.40 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.30 GHz vs 3.90 GHz
• TDP: 255 W vs 77 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 3647 vs Intel Socket 1155
• Architecture: Skylake vs Ivy Bridge
• Process Node: 14 nm vs 22 nm
• Transistors: 8,000 million vs 1,400 million
• Die Size: 688 mm² vs 160 mm²
• L2 Cache: 1 MB per core vs 256 KB per core
• L3 Cache: 38.5 MB shared vs 8 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4 vs DDR3
• Memory Bus: Six-channel vs Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 128.0 GB/s vs 25.6 GB/s
• ECC Memory: Yes vs No
• PCIe: Gen 3, 48 Lanes vs Gen 3, 16 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: None vs Intel HD 4000
• Market Segment: Server/Workstation vs Desktop
• Release Date: 2019-01-29 vs 2012-04-28
• Multiplier Unlocked: Yes vs No

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W-3175X wins every benchmark category, but the nature of the wins suggests specific strengths. It excels in multi-threaded rendering and compute tasks, as evidenced by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 38,692 versus 5,450. The six-channel memory bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s and 48 PCIe lanes make it suitable for data-intensive workstation applications that the Core i7-3770 cannot handle.

The Core i7-3770, despite losing all benchmarks, has its own niche based on its physical attributes. Its 77-watt TDP is dramatically lower than the Xeon's 255 watts, making it viable for compact desktop systems with modest cooling. The integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks. Its DDR3 memory support and dual-channel bus are legacy standards, but they align with older motherboards and existing system builds.

For users with workloads that are heavily parallel — such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific simulation — the Xeon W-3175X is the clear choice, with multi-core leads exceeding 600% in Cinebench tests. For single-threaded responsiveness, the Xeon still wins, but the 80.4% Geekbench single-core lead is the smallest gap, suggesting that the Core i7-3770's 3.40 GHz base clock offers some residual capability for older software. The Core i7-3770 is the only option for socket 1155 systems, while the Xeon W-3175X requires socket 3647 platforms. The production status for both is end-of-life, but the Xeon W-3175X's 2019 release date makes it a more modern platform despite being discontinued.