Intel Xeon 6737P vs Intel Xeon w9-3575X Comparison

The Intel Xeon w9-3575X and Intel Xeon 6737P are both high-end Intel server/workstation processors, but they target different priorities. The w9-3575X, built on the Sapphire Rapids architecture, is a 44-core, 88-thread processor with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz and a 340W TDP. The 6737P, from the Granite Rapids family, is a 32-core, 64-thread chip with a 4.00 GHz boost and a 270W TDP. Benchmark data shows the w9-3575X wins 12 of 16 head-to-head tests, while the 6737P wins 4. The w9-3575X’s overall average benchmark score is 144,323, which is 2.5% higher than the 6737P’s 140,694. However, the 6737P is not obsolete; it wins decisively in specific workloads like integer math and physics. The choice depends on whether the workload favors the w9-3575X’s higher core count and single-thread speed or the 6737P’s newer architecture and specialized strengths.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon w9-3575X as the overall performance leader. Its average benchmark score of 144,323 places it 2.5% ahead of the 6737P’s 140,694, and it claims victory in 12 of the 16 head-to-head comparisons. This lead is consistent across all Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23), where the w9-3575X is 4.7% faster in both multi-core and single-core runs. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the w9-3575X scores 70,837 versus 67,688 for the 6737P. The w9-3575X also wins in PassMark multi-thread (83,338 vs 79,634, a 4.7% delta), data compression (1,219,584 vs 1,157,255, a 5.4% delta), floating-point math (273,398 vs 258,811, a 5.6% delta), and random string sorting (134,723 vs 129,510, a 4% delta). Its single-thread advantage is particularly stark: the w9-3575X scores 3,672 in PassMark single-thread, which is 20.5% higher than the 6737P’s 3,048. This combination of multi-core and single-core dominance makes the w9-3575X the default choice for general-purpose compute, rendering, and mixed workloads.

The Intel Xeon 6737P is not a loser; it is a specialist. Its four wins are significant. It crushes the w9-3575X in PassMark physics, scoring 9,362 versus 6,836 — a massive 27% margin. It also leads in integer math (330,756 vs 298,224, a 9.8% delta), data encryption (65,615 vs 62,258, a 5.1% delta), and prime number finding (697 vs 687, a 1.4% delta). These results suggest the 6737P’s Granite Rapids architecture handles integer-heavy, physics-simulation, and cryptographic tasks more efficiently. The 6737P also operates within a lower 270W TDP compared to the w9-3575X’s 340W, which may be a consideration for dense deployments, though the data does not quantify power efficiency.

Who should pick which: Choose the w9-3575X if the workload is broad — video rendering, code compilation, general multi-threaded computing, or any single-thread-sensitive application. Its 44 cores and 4.80 GHz boost provide a decisive edge across the board. Choose the 6737P if the workload is specifically integer-heavy (like certain databases or financial simulations), physics-heavy, or encryption-focused. In those niches, the 6737P’s performance is 5-27% better. The w9-3575X is the safer all-rounder; the 6737P is the targeted accelerator.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3575X has 44 cores and 88 threads. The Intel Xeon 6737P has 32 cores and 64 threads. The w9-3575X therefore offers 37.5% more cores and 37.5% more threads.

Q: How does the single-thread performance compare?

A: The w9-3575X is significantly faster. In PassMark single-thread tests, it scores 3,672 versus 3,048 for the 6737P — a 20.5% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the w9-3575X scores 1,008 versus 963, a 4.7% lead.

Q: Is the 6737P better at any major benchmark?

A: Yes. The 6737P wins in four head-to-head tests: PassMark physics (9,362 vs 6,836, a 27% advantage), integer math (330,756 vs 298,224, a 9.8% advantage), data encryption (65,615 vs 62,258, a 5.1% advantage), and prime number finding (697 vs 687, a 1.4% advantage).

Q: What are the cache sizes?

A: The w9-3575X has an L3 cache of 97.5 MB, while the 6737P has a larger shared L3 cache of 144 MB. Both have 2 MB of L2 per core, but the w9-3575X has 80 KB of L1 per core compared to the 6737P’s 112 KB per core.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The 6737P has a higher memory bandwidth at 409.6 GB/s, compared to the w9-3575X’s 307.2 GB/s. Both support eight-channel DDR5 memory.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The w9-3575X has an average benchmark score of 144,323, which is 2.5% higher than the 6737P’s 140,694. Both rank in the 98th percentile of all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct Intel architectures. The Intel Xeon w9-3575X is built on the Sapphire Rapids design, fabricated on Intel’s 10nm process. Its die is composed of four separate slices, each measuring 477 mm², totaling a complex multi-die layout. The Intel Xeon 6737P is based on the Granite Rapids architecture, which is the successor design for Intel’s Xeon 6 family, and it uses a smaller 5nm process node. The 6737P’s die is a single 598 mm² piece. This architectural generational difference is central to their performance profiles.

The core microarchitecture also differs. The w9-3575X’s Sapphire Rapids cores feature an 80 KB L1 cache per core, while the 6737P’s Granite Rapids cores have a larger 112 KB L1 per core. The L2 cache is identical at 2 MB per core. The L3 cache, however, diverges: the w9-3575X offers 97.5 MB, while the 6737P provides a more substantial 144 MB of shared L3. This larger L3 on the 6737P likely contributes to its wins in cache-sensitive workloads like integer math and physics.

Another key architectural difference is the platform. The w9-3575X uses the Intel Socket 4677, while the 6737P uses Intel Socket 4710. They are not socket-compatible. The w9-3575X has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the 6737P’s multiplier is locked. The w9-3575X also supports 112 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), compared to 88 lanes on the 6737P. Both support ECC memory and use DDR5.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights the fields where the two processors differ, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | Intel Xeon w9-3575X | Intel Xeon 6737P |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 44 | 32 |

| Threads | 88 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 340 W | 270 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4677 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Architecture | Sapphire Rapids | Granite Rapids |

| Generation | Xeon W (Sapphire Rapids) | Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 4x 477 mm² | 598 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 97.5 MB | 144 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 307.2 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 112 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 88 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2024-08-23 | 2025-02-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $3789 | $4995 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SRN72 | SRVNZ |

The 6737P has a higher base clock (2.90 GHz vs 2.20 GHz) and a higher memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s vs 307.2 GB/s), but the w9-3575X has a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz vs 4.00 GHz) and more PCIe lanes. The release dates show the 6737P launched later, in 2025, versus the w9-3575X in 2024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a clear pattern: the w9-3575X dominates in most tests, with the 6737P winning in a few highly specialized areas.

The w9-3575X’s biggest wins: The most dramatic victory for the w9-3575X is in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 3,672 versus 3,048 — a commanding 20.5% lead. This is reinforced by a 4.7% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core (1,008 vs 963). In multi-threaded workloads, the w9-3575X is consistently 4.7% ahead across Cinebench R15 (7,140 vs 6,822), R20 (29,751 vs 28,428), and R23 (70,837 vs 67,688). The w9-3575X also wins in PassMark multi-thread (83,338 vs 79,634, 4.7%), floating-point math (273,398 vs 258,811, 5.6%), and data compression (1,219,584 vs 1,157,255, 5.4%). Its lead in extended instructions is 4.2% (109,843 vs 105,453), and in random string sorting it is 4% (134,723 vs 129,510). These results show the w9-3575X’s combination of higher core count and higher boost clock provides a broad performance advantage.

The 6737P’s biggest wins: The 6737P’s most significant victory is in PassMark physics, where it scores 9,362 versus 6,836 — a staggering 27% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction across all tests. Next is integer math, where the 6737P scores 330,756 versus 298,224, a 9.8% improvement. In data encryption, the 6737P leads with 65,615 versus 62,258, a 5.1% margin. Finally, in prime number finding, the 6737P scores 697 versus 687, a narrow 1.4% lead. The physics and integer math results are particularly notable, suggesting the Granite Rapids cores are far more efficient at these specific instruction patterns, despite having fewer cores (32 vs 44) and a lower boost clock (4.00 GHz vs 4.80 GHz).

Overall score analysis: The w9-3575X’s average benchmark score is 144,323, placing it 2.5% ahead of the 6737P’s 140,694. In the nearest rivals comparison, the w9-3575X is 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 7643P (144,824) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D (143,735). The 6737P, meanwhile, is 1.7% behind the Intel Xeon 674X (143,103) and 1.9% behind the Intel Xeon 6732P (143,444). The data shows the w9-3575X occupies a slightly higher performance tier overall, but the 6737P’s specialized wins mean it is not universally slower. The choice is workload-dependent.