Intel Xeon 658X vs Intel Xeon 6730P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6730P and Intel Xeon 658X are both Granite Rapids parts on the same 5 nm process and 250 W TDP, but they are tuned for different ends of the server workload spectrum. The benchmark data is unequivocal: the 6730P wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, often by double digits, while the 658X takes only the single-thread Passmark tests. The 6730P is the compute-density champion, leveraging its 32 cores and 288 MB of L3 cache to dominate multi-threaded and data-heavy tasks. The 658X, with its 24 cores but higher 4.90 GHz boost clock, is a specialist for lightly-threaded, latency-sensitive work. This is not a close contest; it is a clear division of labor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the Intel Xeon 6730P comes in the Passmark physics test, where it scores 8606 against the 658X's 6470. That is a 33% advantage, the largest delta in the entire comparison. This is a massive gap that points to the 6730P's superior multi-core scaling in simulation and physics workloads, a direct result of its 32 cores versus 24. No other test comes close to that margin, making it the single strongest argument for the higher-core part.

Beyond physics, the 6730P shows a consistent pattern of double-digit wins in memory and integer-heavy operations. In Passmark integer math, it scores 290740 versus 263995, a 10.1% lead. The extended instructions test shows an even bigger gap: 96204 versus 84626, a 13.7% advantage. Data compression follows at 1138470 versus 1062062, a 7.2% win, while random string sorting goes to the 6730P by 10.6% (113919 vs 103028). Data encryption is also a 6730P win at 6.9% (55964 vs 52357). These results indicate that the 6730P's larger 288 MB L3 cache and additional cores provide a tangible throughput advantage in data manipulation and cryptographic tasks, making it the clear choice for database and analytics workloads.

The floating-point math test also favors the 6730P, with a score of 226838 versus 210480, a 7.8% margin. The find prime numbers test shows a 5.7% lead for the 6730P (686 vs 649). Even in multi-threaded Cinebench tests, where the 658X's higher clocks might be expected to help, the 6730P maintains a narrow but consistent edge. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 6730P scores 62996 against 62466, a 0.8% win. The same 0.8% margin appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core (6349 vs 6296), and it extends to 0.9% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (26458 vs 26235). The story is the same for single-core Cinebench tests: the 6730P wins by 0.9% in R15 (896 vs 888), R20 (3735 vs 3703), and R23 (8893 vs 8818). While these margins are small, they are still wins for the 6730P, proving that its lower base clock does not translate into a multi-threaded deficit.

The Intel Xeon 658X's only wins come in the Passmark single-thread and singlethread tests, where it scores 3728 against the 6730P's 2995. That is a 19.7% advantage for the 658X. This is a substantial margin and the only area where the 658X is clearly superior. The high 4.90 GHz boost clock is the obvious driver here, making the 658X a better fit for workloads that rely on a single thread with minimal parallelism. However, it is important to note that this single-thread win does not translate to Cinebench single-core scores, where the 6730P actually wins by 0.9%. This suggests the Passmark single-thread test is more sensitive to raw clock speed, while Cinebench single-core may benefit from the 6730P's architecture or cache configuration.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6730P has an average benchmark score of 124756, while the Intel Xeon 658X scores 116060. The 6730P also holds a 97th percentile ranking among all CPUs, matching the 658X's percentile.

Q: How does the 6730P compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 6730P's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX, which it edges out by 0.5%. It also leads the AMD EPYC 7642 by 0.6% and the AMD EPYC 9384X by 3.6%, while trailing the AMD EPYC 9354 by 1.6%.

Q: How does the 658X compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 658X's closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 9255, which beats it by 0.3%. It leads the Intel Xeon 6527P by 0.8% and the AMD EPYC 9384X by 3.6%, but trails the Intel Xeon w7-3565X by 1.9%.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark physics, where the 6730P leads by 33%. The second-largest is in Passmark single-thread, where the 658X leads by 19.7%.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both support DDR5 memory with an eight-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. They both also support ECC memory.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The Intel Xeon 658X has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Xeon 6730P does not. This makes the 658X the only one of the two that allows user-controlled frequency tuning.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: choose the Intel Xeon 6730P for any workload that can use more than a few cores. It wins 15 of 17 benchmarks, including all multi-threaded Cinebench tests, and its advantages in physics (33%), extended instructions (13.7%), and integer math (10.1%) are too large to ignore. The 6730P's 32 cores and 288 MB of L3 cache make it the superior processor for virtualization, database serving, scientific computing, and any other parallel processing task. Its average score of 124756 is 7.5% higher than the 658X's 116060, and it holds its own against strong AMD rivals, leading the EPYC 9384X by 3.6%.

The Intel Xeon 658X is the right pick only when single-threaded performance is the absolute priority. Its 19.7% lead in Passmark single-thread is significant, and its 4.90 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison. This makes it suitable for legacy applications, certain financial modeling, or real-time control systems that cannot be parallelized. The unlocked multiplier is a bonus for those who want to push clocks further. However, its 24 cores and 144 MB of L3 cache mean it will lag in any multi-threaded scenario, and its average score is 7.5% lower. The verdict is clear: the 6730P is the general-purpose workhorse, while the 658X is a niche single-thread specialist.

Specification Differences

The most fundamental difference is core count: the 6730P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the 658X has 24 cores and 48 threads. This 8-core, 16-thread gap is the primary driver of the 6730P's multi-threaded dominance. Clock speeds also differ significantly. The 6730P has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, whereas the 658X has a base of 3.00 GHz and a boost of 4.90 GHz. The 658X is clearly clocked higher, explaining its single-thread win. L3 cache is another major split: the 6730P has 288 MB shared, while the 658X has 144 MB shared. Both share the same 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core. PCIe lanes also differ, with the 6730P offering Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only) and the 658X offering Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The TDP is identical at 250 W, and both use the Intel Socket 4710. The 6730P launched on 2025-02-23, while the 658X launched later on 2026-02-01. The 658X is also multiplier unlocked, unlike the 6730P.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Granite Rapids architecture, using the 5 nm process from Intel and a dual-die design with a total die size of 2x 598 mm². The core microarchitecture is identical, with the same 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 cache per core. The key architectural difference is the L3 cache, where the 6730P has 288 MB shared versus 144 MB on the 658X. This doubling of L3 is a direct result of the 6730P having more active cores and likely a different die configuration. The 6730P is part of the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation, targeting scalable performance, while the 658X is in the Xeon 600 (Granite Rapids-WS) generation, focused on workstation functionality. The 658X also features an unlocked multiplier, a rarity for server parts, indicating a different market positioning. Both have identical memory support (DDR5, eight-channel, 409.6 GB/s, ECC), but the 658X provides more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88), suggesting it may be designed for systems with more expansion cards or accelerators.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6730P wins in every multi-threaded and data-intensive category. Its 33% lead in physics makes it the superior choice for simulation, finite element analysis, and other scientific computing tasks. The 13.7% win in extended instructions and 10.1% in integer math point to strength in cryptography, compression, and general-purpose server logic. The 7.2% data compression and 10.6% random string sorting wins indicate better performance in database indexing, data warehousing, and file server workloads. The 7.8% floating-point math lead covers engineering and financial modeling, while the 6.9% data encryption win helps secure communications. The 6730P is also the winner in all Cinebench multi-core tests, making it the better choice for rendering and video encoding if those tasks can scale to 32 cores.

The Intel Xeon 658X wins only in Passmark single-thread performance, with a 19.7% margin. This makes it the clear choice for applications that rely on a single fast core, such as certain real-time processing, legacy code, or interactive workloads. Its higher 4.90 GHz boost clock and unlocked multiplier allow for further tuning. The 658X also provides more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88), making it a better fit for systems with multiple GPUs or high-speed networking cards, even if the CPU compute is lower. However, for any workload that can use more than a handful of threads, the 6730P's core and cache advantages will win out. The choice is a trade-off between raw single-thread speed and expansive multi-core throughput.