Intel Core i7-7700HQ vs Intel Xeon W-3175X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon W-3175X dominates the benchmark comparison against the Intel Core i7-7700HQ, winning all eight recorded head-to-head tests. The margin is enormous in every category, but the gap varies significantly depending on whether the workload scales with core count or single-thread performance.

The most striking result comes from Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Xeon W-3175X scores 3900 against the i7-7700HQ's 589, a 562.1% advantage. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions: R20 multi-core shows 16250 versus 2457 (561.4% ahead), and R23 multi-core shows 38692 versus 5852 (561.2% ahead). These are essentially identical deltas, indicating that the Xeon's 28 cores and 56 threads simply overwhelm the i7's 4 cores and 8 threads in heavily parallelized rendering workloads.

Single-core results are also lopsided, though less extreme. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 550 versus 83, a 562.7% lead. R20 single-core shows 2294 versus 346 (563% ahead), and R23 single-core shows 5462 versus 826 (561.3% ahead). The fact that single-core deltas are nearly identical to multi-core deltas is noteworthy: it suggests the Xeon's higher 4.30 GHz boost clock, combined with its architecture, gives it a per-thread advantage that is almost as large as its core-count advantage.

Geekbench tells a similar story with different magnitudes. In multi-core, the Xeon scores 14331 against 3601, a 298% lead. In single-core, the Xeon scores 1472 against 1082, a 36% lead. The single-core Geekbench result is the closest comparison in the entire dataset, showing that the i7-7700HQ can at least approach the Xeon in lightly threaded tasks. Still, the Xeon wins decisively across the board.

The average benchmark score for the Xeon W-3175X is 10369, while the i7-7700HQ averages 9493. This places the Xeon in the 66th percentile of all CPUs and the i7 in the 65th percentile. Despite the massive performance gap in head-to-head tests, both chips sit near the same percentile ranking, reflecting that the i7-7700HQ remains competitive against the broader CPU landscape for its intended mobile segment.

The Xeon's nearest rivals in the database are other workstation and server parts: the Xeon Gold 6338N (0.2% behind), Xeon E3-1565L v5 (0.5% behind), Xeon Gold 6312U (0.8% behind), and Xeon Platinum 8280 (1.4% behind). The i7-7700HQ's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7402P (0.4% ahead), Intel Atom x7835RE (0.7% behind), Xeon Platinum 8180 (0.9% behind), and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX (1.5% behind). These rival comparisons show that both CPUs are closely matched to their direct peers, but the gap between the two chips themselves is what defines this matchup.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The Xeon W-3175X wins every multi-core test by a massive margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 38692 versus 5852 for the i7-7700HQ, a 561.2% advantage. Geekbench multi-core shows a 298% lead (14331 versus 3601).

Q: Is the Core i7-7700HQ competitive in single-threaded tasks?

A: The i7-7700HQ is closer in single-core Geekbench, scoring 1082 versus 1472 for the Xeon, a 36% gap. However, in all Cinebench single-core tests, the Xeon still leads by over 560%. The i7's single-core performance does not erase the Xeon's advantage.

Q: What is the difference in physical core counts?

A: The Xeon W-3175X has 28 cores and 56 threads. The i7-7700HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon's core count is 7 times higher, which directly explains its dominance in multi-threaded benchmarks.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon W-3175X supports ECC memory with six-channel DDR4 and a memory bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s. The i7-7700HQ does not support ECC, uses dual-channel memory, and supports both DDR3 and DDR4.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i7-7700HQ has integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD Graphics 630. The Xeon W-3175X has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output.

Q: What are the release dates and production statuses?

A: The Xeon W-3175X was released on 2019-01-29 and is end-of-life. The i7-7700HQ was released on 2017-01-02 and is also end-of-life. Both are no longer in active production.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon W-3175X is built on the Skylake-W architecture, part of the Skylake generation, and uses a 14 nm process node manufactured by Intel. Its die size is 688 mm² and contains 8,000 million transistors. The i7-7700HQ uses the Kaby Lake-H architecture, part of the Kaby Lake generation, also on a 14 nm process node from Intel. Its die size is 126 mm², and transistor count is not recorded in the database.

The Xeon's cache hierarchy is substantially larger. It has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 38.5 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-7700HQ also has 64 KB of L1 per core but only 256 KB of L2 per core and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's L3 cache is more than 6 times larger, which helps in workloads with large working sets.

The Xeon W-3175X uses the Intel Socket 3647, a large server/workstation socket designed for high-core-count parts. It supports six-channel DDR4 memory with a recorded bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s. The i7-7700HQ uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, and supports dual-channel DDR3 or DDR4 memory. The Xeon also offers 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the i7 provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

The Xeon has a fully unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The i7-7700HQ has a locked multiplier, preventing overclocking. The Xeon is classified as a Server/Workstation part, while the i7 is a Mobile part. Both are end-of-life, but they target completely different physical and thermal envelopes.

Specification Differences

The Xeon W-3175X has 28 cores and 56 threads, while the i7-7700HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon's base clock is 3.10 GHz and its boost clock is 4.30 GHz. The i7's base clock is 2.80 GHz and its boost clock is 3.80 GHz. The Xeon's thermal design power is 255 W, versus 45 W for the i7.

Memory support differs significantly. The Xeon supports DDR4 with a six-channel memory bus and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The i7 supports DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel bus, and its memory bandwidth is not recorded. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the i7.

The Xeon has 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, the i7 has 16. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the i7 includes Intel HD Graphics 630. The Xeon's socket is Intel Socket 3647, the i7's is Intel BGA 1440. The Xeon's launch MSRP was $2999, while the i7's launch MSRP was $378.

The Xeon's process node is 14 nm with a die size of 688 mm² and 8,000 million transistors. The i7 is also 14 nm but has a die size of 126 mm², with no transistor count recorded. The Xeon's part number is SRF6LQRDK, the i7's is SR32Q.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon W-3175X is the superior processor in every recorded benchmark. It wins all 8 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 36% in Geekbench single-core to 563% in Cinebench R20 single-core. For anyone needing maximum multi-threaded performance, the Xeon is the clear choice, delivering roughly 6.6 times the multi-core performance of the i7-7700HQ in Cinebench R23.

The i7-7700HQ's only meaningful strength in this comparison is its relative competitiveness in Geekbench single-core, where it trails by just 36%. It also has integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. However, the i7's locked multiplier and 4-core design cap its ceiling, and its 45 W TDP is a feature only if you need a low-power mobile chip.

The Xeon's 255 W TDP and $2999 launch MSRP reflect its workstation/server positioning. The i7's 45 W TDP and $378 launch MSRP reflect its mobile positioning. These are not competing products in the same market segment, but the benchmark data shows that if raw performance is the only criterion, the Xeon wins without exception.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W-3175X wins in every multi-core workload. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show a roughly 561% advantage. Geekbench multi-core shows a 298% lead. This makes the Xeon the obvious choice for video rendering, 3D animation, scientific computing, and any workload that uses many threads effectively. Its 28 cores, 56 threads, and 38.5 MB of L3 cache provide the resources needed for heavy parallel processing.

The Xeon also wins all single-core tests, though the margin varies. In Cinebench single-core tests, it leads by over 560%. In Geekbench single-core, it leads by 36%. The Xeon's higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz, combined with its architecture, gives it a per-thread performance edge that even the i7's more modern Kaby Lake design cannot overcome.

The i7-7700HQ's wins are limited to areas not measured in the head-to-head benchmarks. It has integrated graphics, making it a functional standalone system without a discrete GPU. Its 45 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops where power and heat are constraints. Its support for both DDR3 and DDR4 memory provides flexibility for mobile system builders. But in terms of raw compute performance, the i7 does not win a single recorded test.

For a mobile workstation user who values portability and does not require extreme multi-core performance, the i7-7700HQ is a reasonable part. For a desktop workstation user who prioritizes rendering speed and multi-threaded throughput, the Xeon W-3175X is overwhelmingly superior. The choice depends entirely on whether you need a low-power embedded solution or a high-performance compute platform.