Intel Core i7-6700 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6338N Comparison

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 i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N wins every recorded single-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 5050 against the Core i7-6700's 964, a delta of 80.9% in favor of the Xeon.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 170.7 GB/s, while the Core i7-6700 uses dual-channel DDR3 or DDR4 with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

Q: Does the Core i7-6700 include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Core i7-6700 has HD Graphics 530. The Xeon Gold 6338N has no integrated graphics, which is typical for its server/workstation market segment.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N supports ECC memory, while the Core i7-6700 does not.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe support?

A: The Xeon Gold 6338N offers PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the Core i7-6700 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent entirely different design points and generations within Intel's lineup. The Core i7-6700 is built on the Skylake architecture using a 14 nm process node. It is a desktop-oriented part, released on 2015-06-30, and is now end-of-life. The Xeon Gold 6338N uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture on a 10 nm process node, released on 2021-04-05, and remains active in production.

Core count is the most obvious architectural split. The Core i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6338N has 32 cores and 64 threads. This is an 8x difference in core count and an 8x difference in thread count. The Xeon's cache hierarchy reflects its larger core count: it has 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 48 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 256 KB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3 on the Core i7. Both processors use 64 KB of L1 cache per core.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The Core i7-6700 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Xeon Gold 6338N supports only DDR4, but in an eight-channel configuration, delivering 170.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. This is a 5x difference in theoretical memory bandwidth.

PCIe capabilities also diverge sharply. The Core i7-6700 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the Xeon Gold 6338N provides PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which the desktop chip does not. Integrated graphics are present on the Core i7-6700 as HD Graphics 530, whereas the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

The sockets are incompatible: the Core i7-6700 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Xeon Gold 6338N uses Intel Socket 4189. Clock speeds favor the desktop part in base frequency: 3.40 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost for the Core i7-6700, versus 2.20 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost for the Xeon. The Xeon's higher boost is not enough to offset its much larger core count in multi-threaded work. The power envelopes differ as well, with the Core i7-6700 rated at 65 W TDP and the Xeon Gold 6338N at 185 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the Xeon Gold 6338N across all six head-to-head tests. The Core i7-6700 does not win a single recorded benchmark. However, the data also shows there are distinct usage contexts where each part makes sense.

The Xeon Gold 6338N is the clear choice for multi-threaded, server, and workstation workloads. Its 32 cores and 64 threads, combined with eight-channel memory and 48 MB of L3 cache, position it for heavily parallel tasks. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35773, against 6828 for the Core i7-6700, demonstrates a massive advantage in rendering and compute-heavy scenarios. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, which is essential for data integrity in server environments.

The Core i7-6700 occupies a different niche. It is a desktop processor with a lower TDP of 65 W, integrated HD Graphics 530, and a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz. In the recorded data, its single-core scores are lower than the Xeon's, so the classic desktop advantage of higher per-core frequency does not materialize in these tests. The Core i7-6700's strengths lie in its smaller footprint, lower power draw, and integrated graphics, which suit basic desktop systems where a discrete GPU is not required. Its support for both DDR3 and DDR4 memory also offers platform flexibility for older or more varied builds.

The data does not show any benchmark category where the Core i7-6700 outperforms the Xeon. The Xeon wins in both single-core and multi-core tests, as well as in memory bandwidth and PCIe connectivity. The Core i7-6700's only practical advantages are its lower TDP, integrated graphics, and dual memory type support, none of which appear in the head-to-head benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field:

• Cores: 4 (Core i7-6700) vs 32 (Xeon Gold 6338N)
• Threads: 8 vs 64
• Base clock: 3.40 GHz vs 2.20 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.00 GHz vs 3.50 GHz
• TDP: 65 W vs 185 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1151 vs Intel Socket 4189
• Architecture: Skylake vs Ice Lake-SP
• Process node: 14 nm vs 10 nm
• L2 cache: 256 KB per core vs 1 MB per core
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared vs 48 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR3, DDR4 vs DDR4 only
• Memory bus: Dual-channel vs Eight-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 34.1 GB/s vs 170.7 GB/s
• ECC memory: No vs Yes
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes vs Gen 4, 64 lanes
• Integrated graphics: HD Graphics 530 vs None
• Market segment: Desktop vs Server/Workstation
• Production status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release date: 2015-06-30 vs 2021-04-05
• Launch MSRP: $303 vs not available
• Part number: SR2L2 vs SRKY2CD8068904722302

Both processors are locked (multiplierUnlocked is false for both) and are manufactured by Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table contains six Cinebench tests, and the Xeon Gold 6338N wins all six. The deltas are remarkably consistent, with the Xeon leading by roughly 80.9% to 81.1% in every test.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon Gold 6338N scores 3605 against 688 for the Core i7-6700, a delta of 80.9%. The single-core R15 test shows the Xeon at 509 versus 96, a delta of 81.1%. This is the largest percentage gap in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core: Xeon 15024, Core i7-6700 2867, delta 80.9%. Single-core: Xeon 2121, Core i7-6700 404, delta 81.0%.

Cinebench R23, the most recent test in the set, shows the Xeon at 35773 multi-core versus 6828, a delta of 80.9%. Single-core R23: Xeon 5050, Core i7-6700 964, delta 80.9%.

The consistency of the deltas across all six tests is notable. The Xeon leads by approximately 81% regardless of whether the test is single-core or multi-core, and regardless of the Cinebench version. This suggests a fundamental per-core performance advantage for the Ice Lake architecture, not just a raw core count advantage.

The broader benchmark database also shows the Core i7-6700 with an average benchmark score of 11074 and a percentile of 66, while the Xeon Gold 6338N has an average score of 10347 and a percentile of 66. The Core i7-6700's average is actually higher than the Xeon's, despite losing all head-to-head tests. This is because the Core i7-6700 has additional benchmark records (PassMark tests) that are not present in the Xeon's record set. The nearest rivals for the Core i7-6700 include the AMD EPYC 9224 at 11118 (delta -0.4%), AMD EPYC 7542 at 11152 (delta -0.7%), AMD Ryzen 5 3500U at 11176 (delta -0.9%), and Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y at 11191 (delta -1%). The Xeon Gold 6338N's nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon W-3175X at 10369 (delta -0.2%), Intel Xeon E3-1565L v5 at 10320 (delta 0.3%), Intel Xeon Gold 6312U at 10291 (delta 0.5%), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 at 10230 (delta 1.1%).

The Xeon Gold 6338N's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35773 is roughly 5.2 times the Core i7-6700's 6828. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5050 is roughly 5.2 times the Core i7-6700's 964 as well. This parallel scaling in both single and multi-core tests indicates that the Xeon's advantage is not merely more cores, but also a substantially faster core design.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N outperforms the Intel Core i7-6700 in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. It wins all six Cinebench tests, with consistent deltas of roughly 81% across single-core and multi-core workloads. It also offers 32 cores versus 4, 64 threads versus 8, eight-channel memory versus dual-channel, PCIe Gen 4 versus Gen 3, and ECC support.

Users who need server or workstation performance should choose the Xeon Gold 6338N. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35773, ECC memory support, 48 MB of L3 cache, and 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes make it suitable for heavily threaded compute, virtualization, and data-intensive workloads. The Xeon's 185 W TDP and Socket 4189 platform are aligned with a server chassis, not a desktop tower.

The Core i7-6700 is the appropriate pick only for desktop systems where its specific attributes matter: a 65 W TDP, integrated HD Graphics 530, and support for both DDR3 and DDR4 memory. Its launch MSRP was $303, and it is now end-of-life. The benchmark record shows no test where it beats the Xeon, and its single-core scores are also lower. For any workload represented in the Cinebench suite, the Xeon Gold 6338N is the stronger processor. The Core i7-6700 remains a functional desktop part, but the recorded data provides no performance scenario where it surpasses the Xeon.