Intel Core i9-11950H vs Intel Xeon 6337P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6337P and Intel Core i9-11950H sit at opposite ends of the Intel lineup, yet their aggregate benchmark scores are nearly identical. The Xeon 6337P averages 28333 across all tests, while the Core i9-11950H averages 28332, a 0.0% delta that makes this a true statistical tie. Both CPUs land in the 80th percentile of all processors tracked, but the path each takes to that parity could not be more different. The Xeon 6337P is a 6-core, 12-thread Raptor Lake-R part built for servers, while the Core i9-11950H is an 8-core, 16-thread Tiger Lake-H mobile chip. Their head-to-head results reveal a split personality: the Xeon dominates rendering and physics workloads, while the Core i9 counters in data handling and instruction-heavy tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon 6337P’s biggest win comes in PassMark physics, where it scores 1729 against the Core i9-11950H’s 1013. That is a 70.7% advantage, the largest margin in any test between these two chips. The gap is so wide that it suggests a fundamentally different approach to thread scheduling and cache management. Floating-point math tells a similar story, with the Xeon posting 53150 versus 44137, a 20.4% lead. Prime number finding follows suit: the Xeon scores 108 against 93, a 16.1% edge. These three results paint a clear picture of a CPU that excels at raw computational throughput.

Single-thread performance is another Xeon stronghold. In PassMark single-thread, the Xeon hits 4104, while the Core i9-11950H manages only 3141. That is a 30.7% difference, and it appears consistently across Cinebench iterations. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 2651 versus 2439, an 8.7% lead. The same 8.7% delta repeats in Cinebench R20 single-core (1113 vs 1024) and Cinebench R15 single-core (267 vs 245). The Xeon’s boost clock of 5.30 GHz, compared to the Core i9’s 5.00 GHz, likely contributes to this pattern, though the data alone shows the result.

Multi-core Cinebench results mirror the single-core trend. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 18783 against 17279, an 8.7% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 7888 versus 7257, also 8.7%, and Cinebench R15 multi-core comes in at 1893 versus 1741, again 8.7%. PassMark multithread reinforces this with the Xeon at 22098 versus 20900, a 5.7% lead. Despite having fewer cores and threads, the Xeon 6337P consistently outpaces the Core i9-11950H in rendering workloads.

The Core i9-11950H fights back in data-centric tasks. Its largest win is in PassMark random string sorting, where it scores 29375 against the Xeon’s 26135, an 11% edge. Data compression also favors the mobile chip: 246195 versus 237373, a 3.6% lead. Extended instructions go to the Core i9 as well, 16361 versus 15366, a 6.1% margin. Integer math is close but still favors the Core i9: 74649 versus 72301, a 3.1% difference. Data encryption is nearly a tie, with the Core i9 at 12658 and the Xeon at 12604, a 0.4% edge. Out of 17 head-to-head tests, the Xeon wins 12 and the Core i9 wins 5, but the Core i9’s victories are concentrated in memory and string manipulation.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon 6337P is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its 20.4% lead in floating-point math and 70.7% lead in physics make it suited for simulation, scientific computing, and any task that relies on heavy number crunching. The 16.1% advantage in prime number finding reinforces this, as does the consistent 8.7% edge across all Cinebench tests. Single-thread performance is another Xeon stronghold, with a 30.7% margin in PassMark single-thread. For applications that depend on fast single-core response, such as legacy software or lightly threaded workflows, the Xeon 6337P delivers meaningfully better results.

The Core i9-11950H wins in memory and data handling. Its 11% lead in random string sorting and 3.6% lead in data compression indicate a stronger memory subsystem for variable-length data. Extended instructions, which cover SIMD and vector operations, go to the Core i9 by 6.1%, suggesting an advantage in multimedia encoding or cryptography-adjacent workloads. Integer math is also slightly better, 3.1%, which benefits general office tasks and database operations. The Core i9’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache versus the Xeon’s 18 MB likely explains some of this, though the data alone shows the outcome.

The Xeon’s physics win is so large that it swings the overall benchmark average nearly to parity. The Core i9’s wins are narrower, with the largest being 11%, while the Xeon’s wins include margins of 70.7%, 30.7%, and 20.4%. If a workload is compute-bound, the Xeon 6337P is the better pick. If a workload is data-bound, the Core i9-11950H holds its own. The tie in average benchmark score, 28333 versus 28332, means neither chip dominates the other across the board.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6337P scores 4104 in PassMark single-thread, compared to the Intel Core i9-11950H’s 3141, a 30.7% advantage. The Xeon also leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 2651 versus 2439.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core rendering?

A: The Xeon 6337P wins all Cinebench multi-core tests by 8.7%. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18783 versus 17279. PassMark multithread shows a 5.7% lead for the Xeon, 22098 versus 20900.

Q: What is the Xeon’s biggest advantage over the Core i9?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark physics, where the Xeon scores 1729 versus 1013, a 70.7% lead. Floating-point math is second at 20.4%, with 53150 versus 44137.

Q: In which tests does the Core i9-11950H outperform the Xeon?

A: The Core i9 wins 5 of 17 tests: random string sorting (29375 vs 26135, 11% lead), extended instructions (16361 vs 15366, 6.1%), data compression (246195 vs 237373, 3.6%), integer math (74649 vs 72301, 3.1%), and data encryption (12658 vs 12604, 0.4%).

Q: Do the two CPUs have the same overall benchmark average?

A: Yes. The Xeon 6337P averages 28333, and the Core i9-11950H averages 28332, a 0.0% delta. Both sit in the 80th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Core i9-11950H has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon 6337P has 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite this, the Xeon wins the majority of benchmark tests.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ across nearly every physical specification. The Xeon 6337P uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the Core i9-11950H uses Intel BGA 1787. The Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads, whereas the Core i9 packs 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks diverge sharply: the Xeon runs at 3.50 GHz, while the Core i9 idles lower at 2.10 GHz. Boost clocks are closer but still different, with the Xeon reaching 5.30 GHz and the Core i9 capping at 5.00 GHz.

Thermal design power shows a different trade-off. The Xeon 6337P has a TDP of 80 watts, while the Core i9-11950H draws only 35 watts. Memory support also splits: the Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core i9 is limited to DDR4. The Core i9 lists a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Xeon. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the Core i9. PCIe generations differ, with the Xeon offering Gen 5 at 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Core i9 providing Gen 4 at 20 lanes (CPU only).

The Core i9-11950H includes integrated UHD Graphics 750, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Xeon’s die size is 163 mm², smaller than the Core i9’s 190 mm². Market segments differ: the Xeon targets Server/Workstation, while the Core i9 is a Mobile part. The Xeon was released on 2025-02-23 and remains Active, while the Core i9 launched on 2021-05-10 and is End-of-life. The Xeon’s launch MSRP is $375, and the Core i9’s is $556.

Architecture Differences

The Xeon 6337P uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename, and belongs to the Xeon 6 generation (Raptor Lake Refresh). The Core i9-11950H uses Tiger Lake architecture, with the Tiger Lake-H codename, and belongs to the Core i9 generation. Both are built on a 10 nm process node and manufactured by Intel, but the underlying designs differ by several years.

Cache configurations show both similarities and differences. Both CPUs have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache differs: the Xeon has 18 MB, while the Core i9 has 24 MB. This 6 MB difference likely contributes to the Core i9’s wins in data-heavy tests like random string sorting and data compression.

The Xeon 6337P supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core i9 is restricted to DDR4. ECC memory is a Xeon-only feature, reflecting its server pedigree. The Core i9 includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 750, a feature absent from the Xeon. PCIe support also differs, with the Xeon advancing to Gen 5 while the Core i9 remains on Gen 4.

The Xeon 6337P’s higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz and larger TDP of 80 watts suggest a design optimized for sustained performance in workstation environments. The Core i9-11950H’s 35-watt TDP and lower base clock of 2.10 GHz point to a mobile-first design that prioritizes power efficiency. Despite these architectural differences, the two chips land within 0.0% of each other in average benchmark score, making the architecture gap a matter of workload preference rather than overall capability.