Intel Xeon 6736P vs Intel Xeon w7-2575X Comparison

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X and the Intel Xeon 6736P are both high-end server/workstation processors, yet they pursue distinctly different performance strategies. The data shows the w7-2575X, a 22-core Sapphire Rapids part, and the 6736P, a 36-core Granite Rapids part, land at nearly identical average benchmark scores — 88172 for the former and 87864 for the latter, a difference of just 0.4%. Their nearest-rival lists confirm this parity, with each processor appearing in the other’s top two competitors. However, the head-to-head benchmark results reveal a clear split: the w7-2575X dominates in single-threaded and most multi-threaded workloads, while the 6736P counters in specific memory- and cache-intensive tasks. This analysis walks through those results, the architectural reasoning behind them, and which processor suits which use case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, and its victories are often decisive. The largest margin comes in the PassMark single-thread test, where the w7-2575X scores 3300 against the 6736P’s 2024 — a massive 63% advantage. This gap is consistent across single-core Cinebench tests: the w7-2575X leads by 4.1% in R15 single-core (630 vs 605) and by exactly 4% in R20 (2625 vs 2523) and R23 (6250 vs 6008). The pattern suggests the w7-2575X’s higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, compared to the 6736P’s 4.10 GHz, translates directly into per-thread performance.

In multi-threaded Cinebench workloads, the w7-2575X also holds a steady edge, winning every test by 4%. Its R23 multi-core score of 44277 tops the 6736P’s 42561, and the R20 result (18596 vs 17875) mirrors that margin. The PassMark multi-thread score reinforces the trend: 52091 for the w7-2575X versus 50072 for the 6736P, a 4% lead. Interestingly, the w7-2575X achieves this despite having 14 fewer cores and 28 fewer threads — its per-core efficiency and higher clock speeds compensate for the core-count disadvantage.

The w7-2575X also wins in several PassMark compute workloads. Its floating-point math score of 171427 is 14.5% higher than the 6736P’s 149770. Integer math follows suit, with the w7-2575X scoring 219924 versus 206833, a 6.3% advantage. Extended instructions show an even larger gap: 62498 for the w7-2575X against 55563 for the 6736P, a 12.5% win. These results indicate the Sapphire Rapids architecture handles math-intensive and vectorized workloads more efficiently.

The 6736P does not go unanswered. Its biggest win is in PassMark physics, where it scores 6531 against the w7-2575X’s 2222 — a 66% advantage. This is the single largest delta in either direction. The 6736P also wins in find prime numbers (392 vs 218, a 44.4% lead) and random string sorting (103723 vs 77986, a 24.8% lead). Data compression goes narrowly to the 6736P (796658 vs 789817, a 0.9% edge), and data encryption shows a 15% win (46236 vs 39295). These victories cluster around workloads that benefit from the 6736P’s much larger L3 cache (144 MB shared versus 45 MB) and its eight-channel memory bus — the 6736P offers 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth versus 153.6 GB/s for the w7-2575X.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: the Intel Xeon w7-2575X is the better all-around performer for general compute, while the Intel Xeon 6736P excels in niche, cache- and memory-sensitive tasks. The w7-2575X wins the majority of benchmarks, including every Cinebench test, multi-thread PassMark, and the math-heavy PassMark suites. Its 63% single-thread lead is the standout statistic — for workloads that depend on per-core speed, the w7-2575X is the only choice between these two.

However, the 6736P’s wins are not trivial. The 66% physics score advantage and 44.4% prime-number win suggest that parallel, memory-bound workloads — such as scientific simulations or large dataset processing — are its territory. The 6736P also offers more raw cores (36 vs 22) and threads (72 vs 44), which matters for highly parallel tasks even if the current benchmark suite doesn’t always favor it.

Given the near-identical average scores (0.4% apart), the decision hinges on workload profile. Users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness, general multi-threading, and math computation should select the w7-2575X. Those running memory-bandwidth-hungry or physics-heavy applications should consider the 6736P, despite its lower scores in most other tests. The 6736P’s launch MSRP is $3351, while the w7-2575X’s launch MSRP is $1689 — a factor that may influence buyers, though the performance data alone favors the w7-2575X for most scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and nodes. The w7-2575X is built on Sapphire Rapids, a 10 nm design, while the 6736P uses Granite Rapids on a 5 nm process. The process node difference is significant: the 5 nm node allows the 6736P to pack 36 cores into a 598 mm² die, whereas the w7-2575X’s 10 nm process yields 22 cores (die size not listed). The 6736P also has a newer generation designation — Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) versus Xeon W (Sapphire Rapids) — and a different socket: the 6736P uses Intel Socket 4710, while the w7-2575X uses Intel Socket 4677.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The w7-2575X has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 45 MB of L3 cache. The 6736P offers 112 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, but its L3 cache is 144 MB shared — three times larger than the w7-2575X’s. The 6736P’s memory subsystem is also more robust: it supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, compared to quad-channel DDR5 at 153.6 GB/s for the w7-2575X. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory.

PCIe lanes are another differentiator. The w7-2575X provides Gen 5 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the 6736P offers Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only). The w7-2575X has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, whereas the 6736P’s multiplier is locked. Clock speeds favor the w7-2575X: its base clock is 3.00 GHz and boost is 4.80 GHz, versus 2.00 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost for the 6736P. The TDP also differs, with the w7-2575X rated at 250 W and the 6736P at 205 W. Both have no integrated graphics and target the server/workstation market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-2575X is far ahead, scoring 3300 in PassMark single-thread versus 2024 for the Intel Xeon 6736P, a 63% advantage. It also wins every Cinebench single-core test by 4%.

Q: Does the 36-core 6736P win any multi-core benchmarks?

A: No. The w7-2575X wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23) by 4% each, and the PassMark multi-thread test by 4% as well. The 6736P’s higher core count does not translate to wins in these tests.

Q: Where does the 6736P have its largest advantage?

A: The 6736P’s biggest win is in PassMark physics, scoring 6531 against the w7-2575X’s 2222, a 66% lead. It also wins find prime numbers by 44.4% and random string sorting by 24.8%.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: They are nearly identical. The w7-2575X has an average benchmark score of 88172, while the 6736P scores 87864 — a 0.4% difference. Both sit at the 96th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The 6736P supports eight-channel DDR5 memory with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the w7-2575X supports quad-channel DDR5 at 153.6 GB/s. This is a 2.7x difference in theoretical bandwidth.

Q: Which processor is more recent?

A: The 6736P was released on 2025-02-23, while the w7-2575X was released on 2024-08-23. The 6736P is approximately six months newer.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X is the clear winner in single-threaded performance, taking the PassMark single-thread test by 63% and all Cinebench single-core tests by 4%. It also wins every multi-threaded Cinebench test by 4%, along with PassMark multi-thread, integer math, floating-point math, and extended instructions. These results make it the preferred choice for workloads where per-core speed matters — such as databases, general server applications, and any software that isn’t perfectly parallelized. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock and unlocked multiplier give it headroom for overclocking, a feature absent on the 6736P.

The Intel Xeon 6736P wins in five specific areas: data compression, data encryption, find prime numbers, physics, and random string sorting. Its 66% physics lead and 44.4% prime-number advantage highlight strengths in memory-bound and cache-intensive calculations. The 144 MB shared L3 cache and eight-channel memory bus provide the bandwidth needed for these tasks. The 6736P also offers 88 PCIe lanes versus 64, which supports more expansion cards or accelerators. For workloads like physics simulations, encryption, or large-scale data sorting, the 6736P’s architecture delivers tangible benefits despite losing the overall benchmark count.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The w7-2575X has 22 cores and 44 threads, while the 6736P has 36 cores and 72 threads. Clock speeds favor the w7-2575X: 3.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost, versus 2.00 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost for the 6736P. The w7-2575X has a higher TDP of 250 W, compared to 205 W. The socket types differ: Intel Socket 4677 for the w7-2575X and Intel Socket 4710 for the 6736P.

Cache and memory specifications show the 6736P’s advantages. L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the w7-2575X versus 112 KB per core for the 6736P. Both have 2 MB L2 per core, but L3 cache differs dramatically: 45 MB for the w7-2575X versus 144 MB shared for the 6736P. Memory bus width is quad-channel for the w7-2575X and eight-channel for the 6736P, with bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes are Gen 5 with 64 lanes for the w7-2575X and Gen 5 with 88 lanes for the 6736P. The w7-2575X has an unlocked multiplier; the 6736P’s is locked. The process node is 10 nm for the w7-2575X and 5 nm for the 6736P, and the die size is 598 mm² for the 6736P (not listed for the w7-2575X). Release dates and launch MSRP also differ, with the w7-2575X at $1689 and the 6736P at $3351.