Intel Core i7-4790 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a stark contrast between these two processors. Across every benchmark in the comparison set, the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y dominates the Intel Core i7-4790 with decisive margins. The most striking pattern is the consistency of the deltas: every Cinebench test shows the Xeon leading by roughly 527% to 532%.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Xeon Gold 6336Y scores 3899 against the Core i7-4790's 621, a 527.9% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similarly lopsided: 550 versus 87, a 532.2% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore test shows 16249 against 2591 (527.1% ahead), while the single-core test records 2294 versus 365 (528.5% ahead). The Cinebench R23 results continue the trend: 38689 against 6171 in multicore (526.9% ahead) and 5462 versus 871 in single-core (527.1% ahead).

The near-identical delta percentages across all six tests are remarkable. This suggests the performance gap is not workload-dependent but rather a fundamental scaling difference between the two architectures. The Xeon's 24 cores and 48 threads versus the Core i7's 4 cores and 8 threads explains the multicore gaps, but the single-core deltas of over 500% are more surprising. The Xeon's base clock of 2.40 GHz is lower than the Core i7's 3.60 GHz, yet the Xeon still wins single-core tests by a wide margin. This points to architectural efficiency gains in the newer Ice Lake design, not just raw clock speed.

The wins tally is unambiguous: 6 wins for the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y, 0 for the Intel Core i7-4790. No benchmark in the dataset favors the older desktop chip.

The Verdict

The database's percentile rankings place both processors at the 66th percentile among all CPUs, but that parity in overall standing masks a massive generational and segment divide. The Xeon Gold 6336Y achieves an average benchmark score of 11191, while the Core i7-4790 averages 10556. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-1305U (average score 11200, delta -0.1%), AMD Ryzen 5 3500U (11176, delta 0.1%), AMD EPYC 7542 (11152, delta 0.4%), and AMD EPYC 9224 (11118, delta 0.7%). The Core i7-4790 sits near the AMD EPYC 7D12 (10547, delta 0.1%), AMD EPYC 7502P (10512, delta 0.4%), Intel Xeon W-3175X (10369, delta 1.8%), and Intel Xeon Gold 6338N (10347, delta 2%).

Given the data, the choice is not subtle. The Xeon Gold 6336Y is the clear pick for any workload that leverages multiple cores or benefits from the newer architecture's per-clock efficiency. The Core i7-4790, marked as end-of-life in the database, cannot compete on any measured axis. Its only potential advantage lies in its lower 84 W TDP versus the Xeon's 185 W, but the benchmark data shows the Xeon delivers over five times the performance in every test, making the power trade-off trivial for compute-heavy scenarios.

For users constrained to the LGA 1150 platform or requiring DDR3 memory support, the Core i7-4790 remains functional, but the data indicates it is not a competitive choice against the Xeon in any measured workload.

Where Each One Wins

The dataset records zero wins for the Core i7-4790, so the use-case split is entirely one-sided based on measured performance. The Xeon Gold 6336Y wins all Cinebench tests, spanning R15, R20, and R23, in both multicore and single-core variants. This means the Xeon is the appropriate choice for rendering, encoding, scientific computing, virtualization, and any other multithreaded application. Its single-core victories also make it suitable for lightly threaded tasks like legacy software, scripting, or general desktop responsiveness, where the Core i7 cannot match the Xeon's IPC advantage.

The Core i7-4790's only measurable attributes that differ from the Xeon are its integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600), lower TDP, DDR3 support, and desktop market segment. None of these translate into a benchmark win in the head-to-head data. If a use case requires integrated graphics without a discrete GPU, the Core i7 has that capability, but the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. For power-constrained builds where 84 W is a hard limit, the Core i7 fits, but performance will be dramatically lower.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y averages 11191, while the Intel Core i7-4790 averages 10556, a difference of 635 points.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon in the largest recorded benchmark gap?

A: The biggest delta is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon leads by 532.2% (550 versus 87).

Q: Does the Core i7-4790 win any benchmark in the comparison set?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 6 wins for the Xeon and 0 for the Core i7.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for both CPUs?

A: Both are at the 66th percentile among all CPUs, despite the large performance gap in direct comparisons.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon Gold 6336Y supports ECC memory; the Core i7-4790 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Xeon Gold 6336Y supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i7-4790 supports dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon Gold 6336Y is built on Ice Lake-SP architecture using a 10 nm process node, while the Core i7-4790 uses Haswell on a 22 nm node. The Xeon has 24 cores and 48 threads, compared to 4 cores and 8 threads on the Core i7. Cache layouts differ substantially: the Xeon has 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, with 36 MB shared L3; the Core i7 also has 64 KB L1 per core but only 256 KB L2 per core and 8 MB shared L3.

The Xeon's memory subsystem is eight-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s and ECC support. The Core i7 uses dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe capabilities also diverge: the Xeon offers Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the Core i7 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Core i7 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600); the Xeon has none.

The Core i7 has published transistor and die size data: 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The Xeon's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The Core i7's part number is SR1QF; the Xeon has no part number listed.

The production status differs sharply: the Xeon Gold 6336Y is listed as Active, while the Core i7-4790 is End-of-life. Release dates are also far apart, with the Xeon launching in April 2021 and the Core i7 in April 2014. The Xeon targets the server/workstation segment, while the Core i7 is a desktop part.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y | Intel Core i7-4790 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 4 |

| Threads | 48 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.60 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 185 W | 84 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4189 | Intel Socket 1150 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Haswell |

| Codename | Ice Lake-SP | Haswell |

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

| Process node | 10 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 1,400 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 177 mm² |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 36 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 64 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | None | Intel HD 4600 |

| Market segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | 2021-04-05 | 2014-04-30 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $312 |

| Part number | Not recorded | SR1QF |