Intel Xeon 6732P vs Intel Xeon 6737P Comparison

Intel
INTEL

Intel Xeon 6732P

CORE STATE Granite Rapids
CORE SPECS 32 Cores / 64 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 3.8 Base / 4.1 GHz Turbo
CACHE 144 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 350W
ARCHITECTURE Granite Rapids
nm
PROCESS 5 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2025
VS
Intel
INTEL

Xeon 6737P

CORE STATE Granite Rapids
CORE SPECS 32 Cores / 64 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 2.9 Base / 4 GHz Turbo
CACHE 144 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 270W
ARCHITECTURE Granite Rapids
nm
PROCESS 5 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2025

PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS

cinebench_cinebench_r15_multicore
6,412
6,822
cinebench_cinebench_r15_singlecore
905
963
cinebench_cinebench_r20_multicore
26,720
28,428
cinebench_cinebench_r20_singlecore
3,772
4,013
cinebench_cinebench_r23_multicore
63,621
67,688
cinebench_cinebench_r23_singlecore
8,981
N/A
passmark_data_compression
1,339,480
1,157,255
passmark_data_encryption
63,848
65,615
passmark_extended_instructions
106,697
105,453
passmark_find_prime_numbers
628
697
passmark_floating_point_math
261,703
258,811
passmark_integer_math
334,340
330,756
passmark_multithread
74,849
79,634
passmark_physics
8,109
9,362
passmark_random_string_sorting
133,467
129,510
passmark_single_thread
2,506
3,048
passmark_singlethread
2,506
3,048

Analysis: Intel Xeon 6732P vs Intel Xeon 6737P

Both the Intel Xeon 6732P and the Intel Xeon 6737P are 32-core, 64-thread Granite Rapids-SP server processors built on Intel's 5 nm process, but they are tuned for fundamentally different workloads. The 6732P is clocked much higher with a 3.80 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost, drawing 350 W, while the 6737P has a 2.90 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost at a much lower 270 W. Benchmark data shows the 6737P is the faster part in most tests, including a significant 17.8% lead in single-threaded PassMark scores, but the 6732P wins decisively in data compression with a 15.7% advantage. Both chips sit in the 98th percentile of all CPUs, with the 6732P averaging a 143444 benchmark score and the 6737P averaging 140694.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon 6732P has a 4.10 GHz boost clock, while the Intel Xeon 6737P has a 4.00 GHz boost clock. Despite the lower boost, the 6737P wins all Cinebench tests by 6%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6732P has an average benchmark score of 143444, while the Intel Xeon 6737P scores 140694. This places the 6732P about 1.9% ahead of the 6737P, though the 6737P wins more individual tests (11 vs 5).

Q: Are these processors similar to any AMD or other Intel parts?

A: According to nearestRivals data, the 6732P is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Xeon 674X and 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D. The 6737P is 1.7% behind the Intel Xeon 674X and 2.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D.

Q: Do they support the same memory and PCIe specifications?

A: Both support DDR5 memory with an eight-channel bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. However, the 6732P has 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the 6737P has 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

Q: Which chip is better for single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6737P is clearly better, with a PassMark single-thread score of 3048 versus 2506 for the 6732P, a 17.8% difference. It also wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 8981 vs 67688? No, that's multi-core; the 6737P wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 4013 vs 3772.

Q: What are the launch prices?

A: The Intel Xeon 6732P has a launch MSRP of $5295, and the Intel Xeon 6737P has a launch MSRP of $4995.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same Granite Rapids architecture and codename, part of the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation. They are manufactured on the same 5 nm process at Intel, use the Intel Socket 4710, and are marked for the Server/Workstation market segment. The fundamental silicon is identical in cache layout: each has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 144 MB L3 cache.

The key architectural differences are in power and I/O configuration. The 6732P has a 350 W TDP and 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the 6737P operates at 270 W with 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The die size is only listed for the 6737P at 598 mm². Both lack integrated graphics, do not have an unlocked multiplier, and are currently active in production. The 6737P was released earlier on 2025-02-23, while the 6732P came later on 2025-05-21. Their part numbers differ: SRVP2 for the 6732P and SRVNZ for the 6737P.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Xeon 6737P for most compute tasks, despite its lower clocks. It wins 11 of 16 head-to-head benchmarks, including all Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests by a uniform 6%, and takes PassMark physics by 13.4% and single-thread by 17.8%. The 6737P is the better choice for general-purpose server workloads, virtualization, and any application that benefits from higher per-thread performance.

The Intel Xeon 6732P is the pick for specific throughput-oriented tasks. Its wins are concentrated in data compression (15.7% ahead), random string sorting (3.1% ahead), extended instructions (1.2% ahead), floating-point math (1.1% ahead), and integer math (1.1% ahead). If the workload is dominated by compression or sorting, the 6732P is the better buy. However, its 350 W TDP versus 270 W means it draws more power for these niche advantages.

For anyone building a balanced server, the 6737P dominates the Cinebench suite and PassMark multithread (79634 vs 74849), making it the safer default. The 6732P makes sense only when the specific benchmark wins align with the primary application. The 6732P also offers 48 more PCIe lanes, which matters for heavily populated expansion configurations.

Specification Differences

The specifications differ in several key areas. The base clock is 3.80 GHz on the 6732P versus 2.90 GHz on the 6737P, while boost clocks are 4.10 GHz and 4.00 GHz respectively. TDP is 350 W for the 6732P and 270 W for the 6737P. PCIe lane count is 136 for the 6732P and 88 for the 6737P. The die size is only specified for the 6737P at 598 mm². Release dates differ, with the 6737P launched on 2025-02-23 and the 6732P on 2025-05-21. Launch MSRP is $5295 for the 6732P and $4995 for the 6737P. Part numbers are SRVP2 and SRVNZ respectively. All other core specs—32 cores, 64 threads, cache sizes, memory support, socket, and process node—are identical.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon 6737P dominates Cinebench across the board. In R15 multi-core it scores 6822 versus 6412, in R20 multi-core 28428 versus 26720, and in R23 multi-core 67688 versus 63621, each a 6% win. Single-core tests follow the same pattern: R15 shows 963 vs 905, R20 4013 vs 3772, all at 6% margins. The 6737P also wins PassMark multithread with 79634 vs 74849, a 6% lead, and PassMark physics with 9362 vs 8109, a 13.4% advantage. The largest single-thread gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the 6737P scores 3048 versus 2506, a 17.8% difference. It also wins data encryption (65615 vs 63848, 2.7%) and find prime numbers (697 vs 628, 9.9%).

The Intel Xeon 6732P claims five wins, led by data compression at 1339480 vs 1157255, a 15.7% margin. It also wins random string sorting (133467 vs 129510, 3.1%), extended instructions (106697 vs 105453, 1.2%), floating-point math (261703 vs 258811, 1.1%), and integer math (334340 vs 330756, 1.1%). These are narrower margins, but the compression win is substantial and could be decisive for storage or database workloads.

Where Each One Wins

Choose the Intel Xeon 6737P for almost all general compute. It wins every Cinebench test (all by 6%), PassMark multithread, physics, single-thread, data encryption, and prime number finding. The 17.8% single-thread advantage is particularly notable for lightly threaded applications or latency-sensitive tasks. Its lower 270 W TDP also means less heat and power draw in dense server environments. If you run a mix of workloads, the 6737P is the better all-rounder.

Choose the Intel Xeon 6732P for data-heavy workloads. Its 15.7% lead in PassMark data compression is the biggest win any benchmark shows in this comparison, and it also wins random string sorting by 3.1%. The extended instructions, floating-point, and integer math wins are modest (around 1%), but they indicate a slight edge in number-crunching. The 6732P also provides 136 PCIe lanes versus 88, supporting more NVMe drives or GPUs. This makes it the choice for compression-heavy pipelines, sorting applications, or systems requiring maximum I/O expansion.

The 6732P's higher 350 W TDP is the trade-off. It wins where data movement and compression matter, but loses everywhere else. The 6737P is the safer recommendation for most buyers, with broad wins including a 6% advantage in all Cinebench multi-core tests and a 6% lead in PassMark multithread. The final decision hinges on whether the specific benchmark wins of the 6732P—particularly data compression—align with the intended use case.

DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS

SPECIFICATION
6732P
6737P
Core Specs
Cores
32
32 0.0%
Threads
64
64 0.0%
Base Clock (GHz)
3.8
2.9 -23.7%
Boost Clock (GHz)
4.1
4 -2.4%
Frequency (GHz)
3.8
2.9 -23.7%
Turbo Clock (GHz)
4.1
4 -2.4%
Multiplier
38
29 -23.7%
SMP CPUs
2
2 0.0%
Cache
L1 Cache
112 KB (per core)
112 KB (per core)
L2 Cache
2 MB (per core)
2 MB (per core)
L3 Cache
144 MB (shared)
144 MB (shared)
Power
TDP (W)
350
270 -22.9%
Architecture
Architecture
Granite Rapids
Granite Rapids
Codename
Granite Rapids
Granite Rapids
Generation
Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP)
Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP)
Process Size
5 nm
5 nm
Die Size
—
598 mm²
Foundry
Intel
Intel
Memory
Memory Support
DDR5
DDR5
Memory Bus
Eight-channel
Eight-channel
Memory Bandwidth
409.6 GB/s
409.6 GB/s
ECC Memory
Yes
Yes
Platform
Socket
Intel Socket 4710
Intel Socket 4710
PCIe
Gen 5, 136 Lanes(CPU only)
Gen 5, 88 Lanes(CPU only)
AMD Multi-Die
IO Process Size
10 nm
10 nm
Interconnect
UPI Links
4 x24 24 GT/s
4 x24 24 GT/s
CXL
Gen 2.0, 64 Lanes (Shared with PCI-E)
Gen 2.0, 64 Lanes (Shared with PCI-E)
Other
Market
Server/Workstation
Server/Workstation
Production Status
Active
Active
Launch Price
$5295
$4995
Part Number
SRVP2
SRVNZ
Package
FC-LGA18N
FC-LGA18N
Tj Max
100°C
102°C
Bundled Cooler
None
None
View Xeon 6732P Details View Xeon 6737P Details