Intel Xeon 6515P vs Intel Xeon w5-3525 Comparison

Both the Intel Xeon w5-3525 and the Intel Xeon 6515P are 16-core, 32-thread server/workstation processors, but they target very different system designs and workloads. The w5-3525 is a higher-clocked Sapphire Rapids part that wins the majority of benchmark comparisons, while the 6515P is a newer Granite Rapids chip that counters with substantial wins in specific math and physics tests. The data shows a near-total split: the w5-3525 takes 12 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, yet the 6515P's victories are often by much larger margins, making the choice heavily dependent on the application mix.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-3525 boosts up to 4.80 GHz, which is 1.0 GHz higher than the Intel Xeon 6515P's 3.80 GHz boost clock. This directly drives the w5-3525's 16.6% lead in the PassMark single-thread test.

Q: How does the newer 5 nm process node affect the 6515P?

A: The Intel Xeon 6515P is built on Intel's 5 nm node, while the w5-3525 uses a 10 nm process. This architectural difference allows the 6515P to deliver comparable multi-core performance at a 140 W lower TDP (150 W vs 290 W) and with a base clock nearly 1.0 GHz lower.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon w5-3525 and the Intel Xeon 6515P support ECC memory. Both also use DDR5 memory across an eight-channel bus, though the 6515P offers higher memory bandwidth at 409.6 GB/s compared to 307.2 GB/s.

Q: Which chip wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-3525 wins with a score of 38964, just 1.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6515P's 38547. This margin is consistent across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, where the w5-3525 leads by exactly 1.1% in every case.

Q: Are these processors socket-compatible with each other?

A: No. The Intel Xeon w5-3525 uses Intel Socket 4677, while the Intel Xeon 6515P uses Intel Socket 4710. They are not interchangeable, and each requires its own platform.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark loss for the w5-3525?

A: The w5-3525 loses the PassMark find prime numbers test by a massive 43.4% margin. The 6515P scores 385 in that test versus the w5-3525's 218, showing a fundamental difference in how each chip handles integer-heavy prime calculations.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon w5-3525 is the clear winner for single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads. Its 16.6% lead in PassMark single-thread (3330 vs 2855) and 1.1% edge in every Cinebench single-core test make it the better choice for applications that rely on high clock speeds. It also dominates integer math, scoring 5.6% higher (155282 vs 147047), and wins data compression by 2.5% (607435 vs 592645). For general multi-core rendering, it holds a consistent, if narrow, 1.1% advantage across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23.

The Intel Xeon 6515P wins where the workload stresses the memory subsystem or specific instruction paths. Its biggest victory is in find prime numbers, where it is 43.4% faster (385 vs 218), a test that benefits from its larger 72 MB shared L3 cache. It also wins floating-point math by 6.1% (128954 vs 121050) and extended instructions by 7.8% (53383 vs 49242). The physics test shows a 21.6% advantage for the 6515P (3829 vs 3002), suggesting better handling of simulation-style physics calculations.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel Xeon generations. The w5-3525 is based on Sapphire Rapids, part of the Xeon W family, while the 6515P uses the newer Granite Rapids architecture from the Xeon 6 lineup. This generational gap shows up most clearly in the process node: the 6515P uses a 5 nm process, whereas the w5-3525 is built on 10 nm. The newer node helps the 6515P achieve similar multi-core performance with a much lower 150 W TDP.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The w5-3525 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with a total of 45 MB of L3 cache. The 6515P increases L1 to 112 KB per core, keeps the same 2 MB per core L2, and offers a much larger 72 MB of shared L3 cache. This extra L3 capacity directly benefits the 6515P in cache-sensitive workloads like prime number finding and floating-point math.

Die size also tells a story. The w5-3525 uses a multi-die design with 4x 477 mm² dies, while the 6515P does not report a die size. The w5-3525 also provides more PCIe lanes at 112 Gen 5 lanes versus 88 Gen 5 lanes on the 6515P, making it the better choice for systems with many expansion cards or GPUs.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical at 16 cores and 32 threads, but nearly every other key specification differs. The w5-3525 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the 6515P runs at 2.30 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. This translates to a 1.0 GHz advantage for the w5-3525 at both ends of the clock range.

TDP is a major differentiator. The w5-3525 draws 290 W, while the 6515P is rated at just 150 W. This 140 W difference means the 6515P can be cooled with a less substantial solution and fits into power-constrained racks. The socket changes as well: the w5-3525 uses Intel Socket 4677, and the 6515P uses Intel Socket 4710, requiring different motherboards.

Memory bandwidth favors the 6515P at 409.6 GB/s versus 307.2 GB/s, despite both using eight-channel DDR5. The 6515P also has a larger L3 cache (72 MB shared vs 45 MB) and more L1 cache per core (112 KB vs 80 KB). The w5-3525 counters with more PCIe lanes (112 vs 88). Launch MSRP differs, with the w5-3525 at $1339 and the 6515P at $740, though both are now active production parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The w5-3525 wins every Cinebench test by the same 1.1% margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 38964 versus 38547; in R20 multi-core, 16364 versus 16189; and in R15 multi-core, 3927 versus 3885. Single-core results are equally consistent: R23 at 5500 vs 5442, R20 at 2310 vs 2285, and R15 at 554 vs 548. The w5-3525 also wins PassMark multithread by 1.1% (45841 vs 45350) and integer math by 5.6% (155282 vs 147047).

The 6515P's wins are larger in percentage terms. The most striking is find prime numbers, where it scores 385 versus the w5-3525's 218, a 43.4% gap. Physics shows a 21.6% lead (3829 vs 3002), and extended instructions come in 7.8% higher (53383 vs 49242). Floating-point math favors the 6515P by 6.1% (128954 vs 121050), and random string sorting is 1.3% better (64425 vs 63579). Data encryption is essentially a tie, with the w5-3525 ahead by just 0.1% (30507 vs 30476).

The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The w5-3525 has an average score of 67673, while the 6515P averages 67006. This places the w5-3525 at the 94th percentile versus the 6515P's 93rd percentile. In the nearest rival comparisons, the w5-3525 sits within 0.7% of the AMD EPYC 4484PX, while the 6515P is within 0.2% of the AMD EPYC 4465P.

The Verdict

Pick the Intel Xeon w5-3525 if your workload prioritizes raw clock speed and single-thread performance. The data shows it leads by 16.6% in PassMark single-thread and wins every Cinebench single-core test, making it the stronger choice for lightly-threaded applications, legacy software, and tasks that cannot scale across many cores. Its 5.6% integer math advantage and 2.5% data compression win also make it suitable for general-purpose compute and compression workloads. The 112 PCIe lanes support denser expansion configurations.

Pick the Intel Xeon 6515P if your workloads are cache-sensitive or heavily math-oriented. The 43.4% win in find prime numbers, 21.6% win in physics, and 7.8% win in extended instructions show a clear advantage in scientific and simulation-style tasks. The 6.1% floating-point math lead and 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the better fit for memory-bound floating-point code. The 150 W TDP also makes it far easier to integrate into power-limited systems, and the larger 72 MB L3 cache provides a tangible benefit in data-heavy workloads.

For most multi-core rendering and general server tasks, the two are effectively tied. The w5-3525 wins Cinebench R23 by just 1.1%, and the 6515P offers higher memory bandwidth and a much lower TDP. The w5-3525's higher clock speeds give it the edge in single-threaded responsiveness, but the 6515P's newer architecture and cache design make it the more efficient choice for sustained math throughput. Choose based on whether you need clock speed or cache capacity.