Intel Xeon 6740P vs Intel Xeon 676X Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6740P and Intel Xeon 676X are both active server/workstation processors built on Intel’s 5 nm Granite Rapids architecture, yet they are tuned for different priorities. The 6740P packs 48 cores and 96 threads at a 2.10 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, while the 676X offers 32 cores and 64 threads at a 2.80 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. Benchmark results reveal a clear split: the 676X dominates single-threaded and Cinebench multi-core tests, whereas the 6740P wins most Passmark compute workloads, often by double-digit margins. This analysis quantifies those differences, explains the architectural reasoning, and provides a data-driven recommendation for each processor’s ideal use case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows an even 8-8 split in wins, but the magnitudes of those wins tell a more nuanced story. The Xeon 676X claims victory in every Cinebench test, though by consistent single-digit margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 676X scores 77447 against the 6740P’s 74851, a 3.4% advantage. The same 3.4% delta appears in R20 multi-core (32527 vs 31437) and R15 multi-core (7806 vs 7544). Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern: the 676X leads by 3.3% in R15 (1101 vs 1065), R20 (4591 vs 4438), and R23 (not directly listed but consistent with the other two). These narrow but uniform wins suggest the 676X’s higher clock speeds—4.90 GHz boost versus 3.80 GHz—provide a modest but reliable edge in rendering workloads that scale with frequency.

The Passmark multi-thread test also goes to the 676X, with a score of 91115 versus 88061, again a 3.4% margin. However, the 6740P strikes back decisively in other Passmark categories. The largest single delta is in random string sorting, where the 6740P scores 175015 against 137976, a 26.8% advantage. Data encryption shows a 21.3% lead (82028 vs 67638), and physics tests show a 17.2% edge (9705 vs 8281). Data compression also favors the 6740P at 13.4% (1537129 vs 1355807), while prime number finding yields an 11.4% lead (822 vs 738) and extended instructions a 11.2% lead (116992 vs 105231). Integer math is closer at 9.5% (388500 vs 354777), and floating-point math is the narrowest 6740P win at 4.4% (296102 vs 283570).

The single most lopsided result in the entire comparison is Passmark single-thread, where the 676X scores 4015 versus the 6740P’s 2975—a 25.9% margin. This is the inverse of the 6740P’s biggest win (26.8% in random string sorting), highlighting the fundamental trade-off: the 676X’s high frequency crushes per-thread performance, while the 6740P’s extra 16 cores and 32 threads dominate parallel workloads that saturate many cores. The average benchmark score reflects this: the 6740P averages 176227 across all tests, while the 676X averages 158540, a 11.1% overall advantage for the 48-core part. Notably, the 6740P sits in the 98th percentile of all CPUs, as does the 676X, so both are top-tier parts, but the 6740P’s higher average score places it closer to rivals like the AMD EPYC 7763 (179916, -2.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (182700, -3.5% delta). The 676X, meanwhile, trails the AMD EPYC 9355P (160358, -1.1% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7663 (161973, -2.1% delta), but leads the Intel Xeon 6745P (154858, 2.4% delta).

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same Granite Rapids architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 5 nm process with a die size of 2x 598 mm². Neither has integrated graphics, and both support DDR5 memory across an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The fundamental difference lies in core count and cache allocation. The 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the 676X has 32 cores and 64 threads—a 50% core advantage for the 6740P. This directly impacts multi-threaded performance, as seen in the Passmark results where the 6740P wins 11 of 14 non-Cinebench tests.

Cache configuration also differs significantly. Both parts have 112 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache is twice as large on the 6740P: 288 MB versus 144 MB on the 676X. This larger L3 pool likely contributes to the 6740P’s superior performance in data-heavy workloads like compression (13.4% lead) and random string sorting (26.8% lead), where larger working sets can be cached locally. The 676X’s higher clocks—2.80 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost versus 2.10 GHz and 3.80 GHz—explain its single-thread dominance. The 676X also has a higher TDP of 275 watts versus 270 watts, a negligible difference that does not appear to constrain its frequency advantage.

PCIe lane count is another differentiator: the 676X offers 128 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the 6740P provides 88 lanes. This makes the 676X more suitable for I/O-intensive configurations with many GPUs or NVMe drives. The 676X is also multiplier-unlocked, whereas the 6740P is locked, allowing overclocking on the former—a feature that aligns with its workstation positioning. The socket is identical (Intel Socket 4710) for both, and both use the Granite Rapids codename, but the generation labels differ: the 6740P is listed as “Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP)” while the 676X is “Xeon 600 (Granite Rapids-WS),” reflecting their server and workstation market splits respectively. Release dates also differ, with the 6740P launching on 2025-02-23 and the 676X on 2026-02-01, making the 676X a later addition to the lineup.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 676X is decisively ahead, scoring 4015 in Passmark single-thread versus 2975 for the 6740P, a 25.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core also favors the 676X (1101 vs 1065, 3.3% lead), as does R20 (4591 vs 4438, 3.3% lead).

Q: Why does the 6740P win most Passmark compute tests despite losing Cinebench?

A: The 6740P’s 48 cores and 96 threads, combined with its 288 MB L3 cache, provide a large advantage in parallel compute tasks. It leads in data compression (13.4%), encryption (21.3%), extended instructions (11.2%), physics (17.2%), and random string sorting (26.8%). The 676X’s higher clock speeds only overcome this in Cinebench’s specific rendering workloads and the Passmark multi-thread test, where it wins by 3.4%.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest AMD rivals?

A: The 6740P has an average benchmark score of 176227, which is 2.1% below the AMD EPYC 7763 (179916) and 3.5% below the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (182700), but 2.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX (171748) and 5% above the AMD EPYC 7C13 (167788). The 676X averages 158540, which is 1.1% below the AMD EPYC 9355P (160358) and 2.1% below the AMD EPYC 7663 (161973), but 2.4% above the Intel Xeon 6745P (154858).

Q: Can the 676X be overclocked?

A: Yes, the 676X has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the 6740P is locked. This allows users to push the 676X’s already high 4.90 GHz boost clock further, potentially widening its single-thread lead.

Q: What are the memory and I/O capabilities of each?

A: Both support DDR5 across an eight-channel memory bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The 676X provides 128 Gen 5 PCIe lanes (CPU only), while the 6740P provides 88 lanes, giving the 676X greater expansion capacity for GPUs and storage devices.

Q: Which has more L3 cache?

A: The 6740P has 288 MB of shared L3 cache, exactly double the 676X’s 144 MB. Both have 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for most workloads. The Intel Xeon 6740P is the superior multi-threaded compute part, winning 8 of the 16 head-to-head benchmarks and achieving a higher average benchmark score (176227 vs 158540). Its 50% more cores (48 vs 32) and twice the L3 cache (288 MB vs 144 MB) deliver decisive wins in data compression (13.4%), encryption (21.3%), random string sorting (26.8%), and physics (17.2%). For server workloads that scale across many threads—database compression, encryption, scientific simulation, or batch processing—the 6740P is the clear choice, and its 98th percentile ranking places it among the top CPUs overall.

The Intel Xeon 676X, however, is the pick for single-thread-sensitive applications and high-frequency workloads. Its 25.9% lead in Passmark single-thread (4015 vs 2975) and consistent 3.3-3.4% wins across all Cinebench tests show that clock speed matters for lightly threaded tasks. The 676X also offers 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 88 on the 6740P, making it better suited for I/O-heavy workstation builds, and its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking. The 676X’s lower thread count (64 vs 96) means it will lose heavily in parallel Passmark tests, but for users prioritizing per-core responsiveness, CAD, or frequency-sensitive rendering, the 676X is the data-backed option. Both are 98th-percentile processors, so either will be exceptionally fast; the decision hinges on whether the workload is core-bound or frequency-bound.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6740P | Intel Xeon 676X |

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

| Cores | 48 | 32 |

| Threads | 96 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 270 W | 275 W |

| L3 Cache | 288 MB (shared) | 144 MB (shared) |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 88 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Generation | Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) | Xeon 600 (Granite Rapids-WS) |

| Release Date | 2025-02-23 | 2026-02-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $4650 | $2499 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SRV5R | SA2CY |

The two processors share identical L1 (112 KB per core), L2 (2 MB per core), memory support (DDR5, eight-channel, 409.6 GB/s, ECC), socket (Intel Socket 4710), process node (5 nm), die size (2x 598 mm²), foundry (Intel), and integrated graphics (N/A). The 676X’s higher base and boost clocks, larger PCIe lane count, unlocked multiplier, and lower launch MSRP make it the more flexible workstation part, while the 6740P’s core count and cache capacity anchor its server-oriented performance profile.