Intel Core i9-11900H vs Intel Xeon 6325P Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core i9-11900H is the clear all-around performance winner in this comparison, taking 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmark wins. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration dominates the multi-threaded workloads, with the largest margin coming in integer math at 48.3% over the Xeon. The Xeon 6325P, however, is not without its own strengths. It wins the physics test by 6.6% and the single-thread PassMark tests by 26.4%, leveraging its higher 5.20 GHz boost clock. The Core i9 is the pick for content creation, encoding, and any workload that scales with cores and threads. The Xeon 6325P is the choice for single-threaded latency-sensitive tasks and server environments that require ECC memory support, which the Core i9 lacks. The Xeon also comes with DDR5 memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, making it the more forward-looking platform for workstation builds. The data shows the Core i9 is simply the faster processor for the vast majority of tasks, but the Xeon's feature set and lower launch MSRP of $281 (compared to $546) make it a distinct option for specific use cases.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900H has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6325P has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor is faster in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 16,772 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 22.3% ahead of the Xeon 6325P's score of 13,717.

Q: Does the Xeon 6325P support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon 6325P supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i9-11900H does not have ECC memory support.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread PassMark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6325P has a higher single-thread PassMark score of 4,213, which is 26.4% ahead of the Core i9-11900H's score of 3,102.

Q: What is the process node for both processors?

A: Both processors are built on a 10 nm process node by Intel.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon 6325P has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i9-11900H is built on the Tiger Lake-H architecture, a mobile-focused design that Intel released in 2021. The Intel Xeon 6325P uses the Raptor Lake-R architecture, which is part of the Xeon 6 generation and was released in 2025. Both processors are manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node, but the die sizes differ, with the Core i9 measuring 190 mm² and the Xeon at 163 mm².

The cache hierarchy is similar in structure. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. The key difference lies in the L3 cache, where the Core i9 features 24 MB shared, double the Xeon's 12 MB shared. This larger cache pool helps the Core i9 in multi-threaded workloads that require frequent data sharing between cores.

The Core i9 is a mobile part, designed for laptops and uses the Intel BGA 1787 socket. The Xeon is a server/workstation processor on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core i9 is limited to DDR4. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for data integrity in server environments. The Core i9 instead includes integrated UHD Graphics 750, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Core i9 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Xeon provides the newer PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

The production status also differs. The Core i9 is end-of-life, while the Xeon 6325P is still active. The Core i9's launch MSRP was $546, while the Xeon's launch MSRP is $281. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in core configuration. The Core i9-11900H has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon 6325P has 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clock is higher on the Xeon at 3.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz on the Core i9. The boost clock also favors the Xeon at 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The Xeon has a higher TDP of 55 watts, while the Core i9 is rated at 35 watts.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Core i9 supports only DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. The Xeon has ECC memory support, which the Core i9 lacks.

The integrated graphics also set them apart. The Core i9 includes UHD Graphics 750, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The PCIe lanes differ as well: the Core i9 has 20 lanes of Gen 4, while the Xeon has 16 lanes of Gen 5.

The market segments are distinct: the Core i9 is a mobile processor, while the Xeon is a server/workstation part. The production status confirms this, with the Core i9 marked as end-of-life and the Xeon as active. The part numbers are SRKT7 for the Core i9 and SRPLX for the Xeon.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent pattern: the Core i9-11900H wins most tests, often by substantial margins. The most significant win for the Core i9 is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 72,882 against the Xeon's 49,151, a delta of 48.3%. Random string sorting also shows a large gap, with the Core i9 at 28,328 versus 19,113 for the Xeon, a 48.2% difference. Extended instructions follow closely, with the Core i9 scoring 16,123 against 11,645, a 38.5% advantage.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent wins for the Core i9. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core i9 scores 1,690 versus 1,382 for the Xeon, a 22.3% lead. Single-core R15 shows a 22.1% lead with scores of 238 and 195. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 7,044 versus 5,761, again a 22.3% gap. Single-core R20 scores 994 versus 813, also 22.3% ahead. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows with 16,772 versus 13,717, and single-core with 2,367 versus 1,936, both at 22.3%.

Data compression favors the Core i9 by 34.5%, with scores of 239,366 versus 178,020. Data encryption shows a 31.4% lead for the Core i9, scoring 12,232 versus 9,311. Find prime numbers shows a 31.8% advantage, with 87 versus 66. Floating point math is a closer contest, with the Core i9 at 43,094 and the Xeon at 37,265, a 15.6% lead. The PassMark multithread test shows the Core i9 at 20,162 versus 16,138 for the Xeon, a 24.9% difference.

The Xeon 6325P wins only three tests. The PassMark physics test shows the Xeon ahead at 1,020 versus 953, a 6.6% advantage. The PassMark single-thread tests (both single_thread and singlethread) show the Xeon at 4,213 versus 3,102 for the Core i9, a 26.4% lead in both cases.

The overall benchmark average tells a similar story. The Core i9 has an average benchmark score of 21,367, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon has an average score of 20,821, placing it in the 74th percentile. The Core i9's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V at a score of 21,440, which is 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 at 21,484, which is 0.5% higher. The Xeon's closest competitor is the Intel Core Ultra 5 125U, which matches its score at 20,826. The data indicates that while both processors sit at a similar percentile level, the Core i9 delivers meaningfully higher performance in the vast majority of measured workloads.