Intel Xeon 658X vs Intel Xeon 6710E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the Intel Xeon 6710E and Intel Xeon 658X, with the 658X taking 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark wins while the 6710E claims 5. The most striking pattern is the near-uniform 15.9% deficit for the 6710E across all Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core tests show the 658X ahead by exactly 15.9%. For example, the 658X scores 6,296 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 5,292 for the 6710E, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core the 658X reaches 62,466 while the 6710E manages 52,508. The single-core gap is equally consistent: 888 versus 747 in R15, 3,703 versus 3,113 in R20, and 8,818 versus 7,413 in R23.

The PassMark suite reveals a more nuanced picture. The 6710E dominates in several throughput-oriented workloads. Its biggest win is in data encryption, where it scores 81,850 versus 52,357 for the 658X, a 56.3% advantage. Random string sorting also favors the 6710E heavily, with 151,491 points against 103,028, a 47% lead. Data compression goes to the 6710E at 1,230,786 versus 1,062,062, a 15.9% margin, and integer math shows a 14.8% win (302,954 versus 263,995). Floating-point math is closer, with the 6710E ahead by just 4.5% (219,926 versus 210,480).

The 658X counters with substantial wins in other PassMark tests. Extended instructions show an 84,626 score versus 59,625, a 29.5% advantage. Find prime numbers goes to the 658X at 649 versus 451, a 30.5% lead. Physics tests favor the 658X by 22.7% (6,470 versus 5,000), and the multi-thread score shows a 15.9% gap (73,490 versus 61,775). The most dramatic difference appears in single-thread performance: the 658X scores 3,728 against 1,910 for the 6710E, a 48.8% deficit for the 6710E. This single-thread gap is the largest delta recorded in any benchmark between the two processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6710E records an average benchmark score of 129,930, while the Intel Xeon 658X averages 116,060. The 6710E sits 2.5% above the AMD EPYC 9354 and 2.4% below the AMD EPYC 9275F, whereas the 658X is nearly level with the AMD EPYC 9255 at a 0.3% deficit.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded workloads?

A: The 658X is decisively stronger in single-thread tests. PassMark single-thread shows 3,728 for the 658X versus 1,910 for the 6710E, a 48.8% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core also favors the 658X at 8,818 versus 7,413, a 15.9% difference.

Q: Where does the 6710E outperform the 658X?

A: The 6710E wins in data encryption (56.3% ahead), random string sorting (47% ahead), data compression (15.9% ahead), integer math (14.8% ahead), and floating-point math (4.5% ahead). These are throughput-oriented tasks that benefit from its 64 cores.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon 6710E has 64 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Xeon 658X has 24 cores and 48 threads, meaning it supports two threads per core.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon 6710E and the Intel Xeon 658X list ECC memory support as enabled, and both use DDR5 memory with an eight-channel memory bus.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon 658X boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 6710E boosts to 3.20 GHz. The base clocks are 3.00 GHz for the 658X and 2.40 GHz for the 6710E.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6710E is the clear choice for workloads that scale with raw core count and favor memory-level parallelism. Its wins in data encryption and random string sorting, with leads of 56.3% and 47% respectively, suggest strong performance in data transformation and compression tasks. The 15.9% edge in data compression and the 14.8% lead in integer math reinforce this profile. The 6710E also edges out the 658X in floating-point math, though by a modest 4.5%. Its 64 cores and 64 threads, combined with 96 MB of shared L3 cache, make it suitable for highly parallel server workloads such as database processing, bulk data operations, and encryption-heavy services.

The Intel Xeon 658X wins in every Cinebench test, indicating superior performance in rendering and general multi-threaded compute when core count is not the limiting factor. Its 15.9% margin across all Cinebench multi-core tests, despite having only 24 cores, shows that its higher clock speeds and per-core efficiency matter more in these workloads. The 658X also dominates in extended instructions (29.5% ahead), prime number finding (30.5% ahead), physics simulation (22.7% ahead), and multi-thread PassMark (15.9% ahead). Its single-thread advantage is overwhelming at 48.8%, making it the better option for latency-sensitive applications, workstation tasks, and any software that relies heavily on single-core performance.

The use-case split is straightforward: the 6710E targets scale-out throughput environments where many parallel threads process independent data streams, while the 658X targets scale-up environments where fewer, faster threads and high single-thread performance are prioritized. For server consolidation with diverse workloads, the 658X offers more balanced strength across the benchmark suite, winning 12 of 17 tests. For dedicated encryption, compression, or string-processing pipelines, the 6710E provides a substantial edge.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge sharply on core configuration. The Intel Xeon 6710E packs 64 cores with 64 threads, while the Intel Xeon 658X has 24 cores with 48 threads. This means the 6710E runs one thread per core, whereas the 658X runs two threads per core. The clock speeds differ accordingly: the 6710E has a 2.40 GHz base clock and a 3.20 GHz boost clock, while the 658X has a 3.00 GHz base clock and a 4.90 GHz boost clock. The 658X boosts 1.70 GHz higher, which explains its single-thread dominance.

Thermal design power also differs, with the 6710E rated at 205 W and the 658X at 250 W. Both use Intel Socket 4710, so they are socket-compatible, but the power delivery requirements differ. The 6710E has a die size of 578 mm², while the 658X uses a dual-die configuration with 2x 598 mm². The cache hierarchy is different as well: the 6710E has 96 KB of L1 per core and 4 MB of L2 per module, with 96 MB of shared L3 cache. The 658X has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 144 MB of shared L3 cache. The 658X therefore offers 48 MB more shared L3 cache.

Memory bandwidth favors the 658X at 409.6 GB/s versus 358.4 GB/s for the 6710E, a 14.3% difference. PCIe lane counts also differ: the 658X provides 128 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the 6710E provides 88 Gen 5 lanes. The 6710E is a locked processor with a fixed multiplier, while the 658X has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The release dates differ by roughly 20 months, with the 6710E launching in June 2024 and the 658X in February 2026. The 6710E has a launch MSRP of $2749, while the 658X has a launch MSRP of $1699.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Xeon 6710E is built on the Sierra Forest architecture, specifically the Xeon 6 generation (Sierra Forest-SP). The Intel Xeon 658X uses the Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 600 generation (Granite Rapids-WS). Both are manufactured on a 5 nm process by Intel, but the architectural philosophy differs significantly.

Sierra Forest is designed for high-density, efficiency-focused deployments. The 6710E's 64 cores with one thread each and 96 KB L1 per core reflect an orientation toward maximizing parallel throughput per watt. Its 4 MB L2 per module suggests a modular design where cores share cache within modules, reducing complexity in favor of scaling. The 96 MB shared L3 cache is substantial but smaller than the 658X's pool. The 88 PCIe lanes and 358.4 GB/s memory bandwidth are adequate for many server roles but lean toward power-conscious configurations.

Granite Rapids is a performance-oriented architecture. The 658X's 24 cores with 48 threads, 112 KB L1 per core, and 2 MB L2 per core indicate a design focused on high clock speeds and per-core efficiency. The 144 MB shared L3 cache, 128 PCIe lanes, and 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth provide more headroom for data-intensive workloads. The dual-die design (2x 598 mm²) versus the single-die 578 mm² of the 6710E points to a more complex implementation aimed at maximizing memory and I/O throughput.

The unlocked multiplier on the 658X further separates the two: it allows end users to push clocks beyond the stock 4.90 GHz boost, while the 6710E runs at fixed multipliers. The different cache topologies also affect behavior: the 658X's per-core L2 allocation (2 MB per core) gives each core private fast cache, whereas the 6710E's per-module L2 (4 MB per module) is shared within modules. These architectural choices align with the benchmark results, where the 658X wins on latency-sensitive and single-thread tests while the 6710E wins on parallel throughput.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct deployment profiles. The Intel Xeon 6710E is the correct pick for environments running encryption-heavy services, compression pipelines, large-scale integer processing, or random string sorting workloads. Its 56.3% lead in data encryption and 47% lead in random string sorting are the largest margins recorded in this comparison. The 64-core configuration with 64 threads provides massive parallelism for workloads that can saturate all cores. Its lower TDP of 205 W, compared to 250 W for the 658X, also makes it more suitable for dense server deployments where power envelopes are tight.

The Intel Xeon 658X is the better choice for general-purpose compute, rendering, physics simulation, and any workload that benefits from high single-thread performance. Its 48.8% single-thread advantage over the 6710E is decisive, and its 15.9% lead across all Cinebench tests shows consistent multi-core superiority in rendering tasks despite having 40 fewer cores. The 658X also offers more memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s versus 358.4 GB/s) and more PCIe lanes (128 versus 88), making it suited for systems with heavy I/O demands. The unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for users who want to exceed stock clocks.

For users deciding between the two, the benchmark data recommends the 658X for workstation-class workloads, software development, and mixed-use servers where response time matters. The 6710E is recommended for scale-out data centers running specialized throughput tasks like encryption, compression, and bulk data transformation. The 658X wins the majority of benchmarks (12 out of 17), but the 6710E wins the tests where it matters most for specific high-volume workloads. Both processors sit in the 97th percentile of all CPUs in the database, confirming that either choice delivers top-tier performance. The selection ultimately comes down to workload shape: prioritize single-thread speed and balanced performance with the 658X, or prioritize parallel throughput in encryption and data processing with the 6710E.