Intel Xeon 6511P vs Intel Xeon 6724P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6724P and Intel Xeon 6511P are both 16-core Granite Rapids-SP server processors, but the data reveals they occupy different performance tiers despite sharing the same core count and architecture. The 6724P leads in 16 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the 6511P manages a single win in data compression. The average benchmark scores reflect this gap: the 6724P posts an average of 72,396 versus 71,051 for the 6511P, placing both in the 94th percentile among all CPUs. This places the 6724P within 0.1% of the Intel Xeon 6517P and 0.7% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, while the 6511P sits within 0.2% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and 0.4% of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single-threaded results show the largest performance gap between the two processors. In PassMark's single-thread test, the 6724P scores 3,279 against 2,545 for the 6511P, a decisive 28.8% advantage. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 6724P scores 6,161 versus 5,815, a 6% lead. The single-core advantage is consistent across all Cinebench versions: R15 shows 620 versus 586 (5.8%), and R20 shows 2,587 versus 2,442 (5.9%). These results indicate the 6724P's higher clock speeds translate directly into faster per-thread execution, which matters for lightly threaded workloads.

Multi-threaded benchmarks tell a similar story, though with smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 6724P scores 43,643 against 41,196 for the 6511P, a 5.9% advantage. The R20 multi-core result is 18,330 versus 17,302 (5.9%), and R15 multi-core is 4,399 versus 4,152 (5.9%). The PassMark multi-thread test shows a wider gap: 51,345 versus 45,687, a 12.4% lead for the 6724P. This suggests the 6724P scales better across all cores, likely due to its higher sustained clocks.

The most dramatic single result comes from PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the 6724P scores 372 against 308, a 20.8% advantage. This workload heavily rewards raw integer throughput per core, and the 6724P's higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz versus 4.20 GHz shows up clearly here. Data encryption also favors the 6724P significantly: 34,332 versus 31,429, a 9.2% lead.

The 6511P's only win comes in PassMark data compression, where it scores 640,808 against 627,185, a 2.1% advantage. This is an unusual result given the 6724P's general superiority, but compression workloads can be sensitive to memory latency and specific instruction scheduling. The margin is modest, and it does not offset the 6724P's wins elsewhere.

Other PassMark results reinforce the 6724P's dominance. Floating point math shows 135,404 versus 127,307 (6.4%), integer math shows 172,216 versus 162,524 (6%), extended instructions show 54,101 versus 50,730 (6.6%), physics shows 5,004 versus 4,678 (7%), and random string sorting shows 68,477 versus 67,809 (1%). The 6724P wins every computational category that stresses raw throughput, with margins ranging from 1% to 28.8%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 6724P is consistently faster in single-core tests. It leads by 28.8% in PassMark single-thread (3,279 versus 2,545) and by 5.9% to 6% across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, with the R23 score being 6,161 versus 5,815.

Q: Is the multi-core performance gap similar to the single-core gap?

A: No, the multi-core gap is smaller but still favors the 6724P. Cinebench multi-core tests show a 5.9% advantage across R15, R20, and R23, but PassMark multi-thread shows a larger 12.4% lead (51,345 versus 45,687).

Q: Does the 6511P win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the 6511P wins the PassMark data compression test with a score of 640,808 versus 627,185, a 2.1% advantage. This is its only win across the 17 head-to-head comparisons.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The 6724P has an average benchmark score of 72,396, which is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6517P and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF. The 6511P scores 71,051, which is 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and 0.4% behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270.

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

A: There is no difference. Both processors support DDR5 memory with an eight-channel bus and provide 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each processor?

A: The 6724P has a TDP of 210 watts, while the 6511P has a TDP of 150 watts. This difference of 60 watts reflects the 6724P's higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.30 GHz for the 6511P.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same Granite Rapids architecture, codename Granite Rapids, and are manufactured on Intel's 5 nm process. They are part of the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation, use the Intel Socket 4710, and have identical cache hierarchies: 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 72 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 16 cores and 32 threads, support DDR5 memory with ECC, and lack integrated graphics. The production status is Active for both, with the same release date of 2025-02-23.

The key architectural difference lies in clock speeds. The 6724P operates at a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the 6511P runs at 2.30 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. This 1.30 GHz base clock difference is substantial and explains the 6724P's consistent performance advantage in most benchmarks. The boost clock gap is smaller at 0.10 GHz, but it still contributes to the 6724P's edge in single-threaded tests.

PCIe lane counts also differ. The 6724P provides 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the 6511P provides 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). This is a significant difference for systems that need to attach many high-bandwidth devices, such as GPUs or NVMe storage arrays. The 6511P's extra 48 lanes make it more suitable for I/O-heavy configurations, despite its lower computational performance.

The part numbers differ (SRVUA for the 6724P, SRVU9 for the 6511P), and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Both processors target the server/workstation market segment and are actively produced. The 6724P has a launch MSRP of $3622, while the 6511P has a launch MSRP of $815.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Xeon 6724P for raw computational performance. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 1% in random string sorting to 28.8% in PassMark single-thread. The 6724P's average benchmark score of 72,396 is 1.9% higher than the 6511P's 71,051, and it ranks alongside more expensive rivals like the Intel Xeon 6517P and Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF.

The 6511P is not without merit. Its single win in data compression shows it can handle certain memory-bound workloads competitively, and its 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more expansion capability than the 6724P's 88 lanes. For systems that prioritize I/O throughput over compute performance, the 6511P's additional lanes could be decisive.

However, for general-purpose server workloads, the 6724P's higher base clock (3.60 GHz versus 2.30 GHz) and boost clock (4.30 GHz versus 4.20 GHz) deliver consistent advantages across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The 6724P's 210-watt TDP is higher than the 6511P's 150 watts, but this trade-off buys meaningful performance in both single-threaded and multi-threaded scenarios.

The choice between these two processors depends on whether compute performance or I/O capacity matters more. The 6724P is the clear winner for CPU-bound tasks, while the 6511P offers more PCIe lanes for storage and accelerator-heavy systems at a lower launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several specification fields. The base clock is 3.60 GHz for the 6724P versus 2.30 GHz for the 6511P, a difference of 1.30 GHz. The boost clock is 4.30 GHz versus 4.20 GHz, a 0.10 GHz difference. The TDP is 210 watts for the 6724P and 150 watts for the 6511P.

PCIe lane counts differ significantly: the 6724P provides 88 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the 6511P provides 136 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). The part numbers are SRVUA for the 6724P and SRVU9 for the 6511P. The launch MSRP differs, with the 6724P at $3622 and the 6511P at $815.

All other specifications are identical. Both have 16 cores, 32 threads, 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 72 MB shared L3, DDR5 memory support, an eight-channel memory bus, 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC support, Intel Socket 4710, Granite Rapids architecture, 5 nm process, no integrated graphics, and are in the server/workstation market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6724P wins in virtually every computational category. It excels in single-threaded workloads, as shown by its 28.8% lead in PassMark single-thread and 6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core. It also dominates multi-threaded tasks, with a 12.4% lead in PassMark multi-thread and 5.9% leads across all Cinebench multi-core tests. Specific workloads where the 6724P performs best include prime number finding (20.8% lead), data encryption (9.2% lead), physics simulation (7% lead), extended instructions (6.6% lead), floating point math (6.4% lead), and integer math (6% lead). These results make the 6724P the better choice for compute-intensive applications such as scientific simulation, financial modeling, and general server processing.

The Intel Xeon 6511P wins only in data compression, with a 2.1% advantage over the 6724P. This makes it preferable for workloads that involve heavy data compression or decompression, such as backup systems, log processing, or certain database operations. Additionally, the 6511P's 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus the 6724P's 88 lanes make it more suitable for systems requiring extensive I/O expansion, such as servers with multiple GPUs, high-capacity NVMe storage arrays, or network interface cards. The 6511P's lower TDP of 150 watts also makes it easier to cool and power in dense server configurations, though the 6724P's 210-watt TDP is acceptable for most server platforms. For users prioritizing raw computational throughput, the 6724P is the clear choice; for those needing maximum I/O capacity or specializing in compression workloads, the 6511P offers distinct advantages.