Intel Xeon 6740P vs Intel Xeon w9-3575X Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Xeon w9-3575X has 44 cores and 88 threads. The 6740P offers 4 more cores and 8 more threads.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3575X wins in PassMark single-thread testing with a score of 3672 versus 2975 for the 6740P, a 19% advantage. However, in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, the 6740P wins by 5.7% each time.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3575X boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 6740P boosts to 3.80 GHz. The w9-3575X has a 1.00 GHz higher boost clock.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The Intel Xeon 6740P has 288 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon w9-3575X has 97.5 MB of L3 cache. The 6740P has roughly three times the L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon 6740P has a memory bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s, while the Intel Xeon w9-3575X has 307.2 GB/s. The 6740P provides 33% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon 6740P uses Intel Socket 4710, while the Intel Xeon w9-3575X uses Intel Socket 4677. They are not socket compatible.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Xeon 6740P is built on Granite Rapids architecture, which the database lists as Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP), and is fabricated on a 5 nm process. The Intel Xeon w9-3575X uses Sapphire Rapids architecture, classified as Xeon W (Sapphire Rapids), on a 10 nm process. This node difference is substantial: the 6740P uses a smaller process node, which typically allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency. The die size also reflects a different physical layout, with the 6740P using a 2x 598 mm² configuration and the w9-3575X using a 4x 477 mm² configuration.

The core and cache hierarchy differ significantly. The 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads, with 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and a large 288 MB shared L3 cache. The w9-3575X has 44 cores and 88 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 97.5 MB of L3 cache. The L1 cache difference means the 6740P carries 32 KB more L1 per core, which can benefit latency-sensitive workloads. The L3 cache gap is the most striking architectural difference: 288 MB versus 97.5 MB gives the 6740P a massive advantage in cache capacity.

Both processors support DDR5 memory with an eight-channel memory bus, but the 6740P reaches 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 307.2 GB/s for the w9-3575X. Both support ECC memory and have no integrated graphics. PCIe connectivity differs: the 6740P offers Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only), while the w9-3575X offers Gen 5 with 112 lanes (CPU only). The w9-3575X provides more PCIe lanes, which matters for systems with many expansion cards or GPUs.

The w9-3575X has an unlocked multiplier, while the 6740P does not. This means the w9-3575X can be overclocked if the platform allows it, whereas the 6740P is locked. The w9-3575X also has a higher base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and a notably higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus 3.80 GHz.

The TDP ratings also differ: the 6740P is rated at 270 W, while the w9-3575X is rated at 340 W. This makes the w9-3575X the more power-hungry part on paper, despite having fewer cores. The release dates differ as well, with the w9-3575X released in August 2024 and the 6740P released in February 2025.

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently favors the Intel Xeon 6740P in most workloads. In the head-to-head benchmark table, the 6740P wins 14 out of 16 comparisons. The only two wins for the w9-3575X are in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests, where it leads by 19%. For users prioritizing per-thread performance in lightly threaded applications, the w9-3575X has a clear edge.

For multi-core and heavily threaded workloads, the 6740P is the stronger choice. It wins every Cinebench multi-core test by 5.7%, and its PassMark multithread score of 88061 beats the w9-3575X's 83338 by 5.7%. The 6740P also dominates in data compression, encryption, integer math, physics, and random string sorting, with wins ranging from 19.7% to 42%.

The w9-3575X offers more PCIe lanes (112 versus 88) and a higher boost clock, which may appeal to systems that need maximum I/O expansion or single-thread speed. It also has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. However, the 6740P's larger cache, higher memory bandwidth, and superior multi-core results make it the better overall performer for server and workstation workloads that scale across cores.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a similar story: the 6740P has an average score of 176227, while the w9-3575X has 144323. The 6740P is also positioned against higher-tier rivals in its nearest rivals list, including the AMD EPYC 7763 with a delta of -2.1% and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX with a delta of -3.5%. The w9-3575X sits closer to mid-range parts like the AMD EPYC 7643P at -0.3% and the Intel Xeon 6732P at 0.6%.

The data indicates that the 6740P is the better choice for most server workloads, while the w9-3575X is preferable for scenarios where single-thread speed and I/O expansion are the primary concerns.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the w9-3575X has 44 cores and 88 threads. The base clocks are close, with the w9-3575X at 2.20 GHz and the 6740P at 2.10 GHz, but the boost clocks diverge sharply: 4.80 GHz for the w9-3575X versus 3.80 GHz for the 6740P.

TDP is higher on the w9-3575X at 340 W, compared to 270 W for the 6740P. The sockets are different: Socket 4710 for the 6740P and Socket 4677 for the w9-3575X. The architecture and process node differ as well, with Granite Rapids on 5 nm for the 6740P and Sapphire Rapids on 10 nm for the w9-3575X. The die size is 2x 598 mm² for the 6740P and 4x 477 mm² for the w9-3575X.

Cache configurations differ in L1 and L3. The 6740P has 112 KB of L1 per core and 288 MB of shared L3, while the w9-3575X has 80 KB of L1 per core and 97.5 MB of L3. Both have 2 MB of L2 per core. Memory bandwidth is higher on the 6740P at 409.6 GB/s versus 307.2 GB/s, though both use eight-channel DDR5. PCIe lanes favor the w9-3575X with 112 lanes versus 88 lanes, both Gen 5.

The 6740P has a locked multiplier, while the w9-3575X is multiplier unlocked. The release dates are different: the 6740P launched in February 2025, and the w9-3575X launched in August 2024. The launch MSRP for the 6740P is $4650, and the launch MSRP for the w9-3575X is $3789. Part numbers also differ: SRV5R for the 6740P and SRN72 for the w9-3575X.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided win for the Intel Xeon 6740P comes in PassMark physics, where it scores 9705 versus 6836 for the w9-3575X, a 42% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head table. Data encryption also shows a major gap, with the 6740P scoring 82028 versus 62258, a 31.8% win. Integer math favors the 6740P at 388500 versus 298224, a 30.3% lead. Random string sorting gives the 6740P a 29.9% win at 175015 versus 134723. Data compression shows a 26% advantage for the 6740P, with scores of 1537129 versus 1219584.

Find prime numbers is another notable win for the 6740P, scoring 822 versus 687, a 19.7% margin. Floating point math favors the 6740P at 296102 versus 273398, an 8.3% win. Extended instructions give the 6740P a 6.5% edge at 116992 versus 109843. All Cinebench tests, both multi-core and single-core, show a consistent 5.7% win for the 6740P. This includes R15 multi-core at 7544 versus 7140, R15 single-core at 1065 versus 1008, R20 multi-core at 31437 versus 29751, R20 single-core at 4438 versus 4200, and R23 multi-core at 74851 versus 70837. PassMark multithread also shows a 5.7% win at 88061 versus 83338.

The only wins for the w9-3575X are in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests, which are identical results: 3672 versus 2975, a 19% advantage. This is the single largest win for either processor in the head-to-head table, but it is isolated to one type of workload.

The overall benchmark record shows that the 6740P wins 14 comparisons and the w9-3575X wins 2. The average benchmark score reinforces this, with the 6740P at 176227 and the w9-3575X at 144323.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6740P wins in workloads that scale with core count, cache capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its 48 cores and 96 threads give it a natural advantage in multi-threaded applications. The 288 MB of L3 cache and 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth help with data-heavy tasks such as compression, encryption, and sorting. The PassMark physics result, a 42% win, indicates strong performance in simulation and physical modeling workloads. Integer math and floating point math also favor the 6740P, making it suitable for scientific computing, financial modeling, and general number-crunching. The 5.7% wins across all Cinebench versions suggest consistent scaling in rendering and 3D workloads.

The Intel Xeon w9-3575X wins in single-threaded performance, as measured by PassMark single-thread tests. Its 19% advantage there is significant, and its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz supports this strength. The w9-3575X also offers more PCIe lanes at 112 versus 88, which makes it a better fit for systems with many GPUs, NVMe drives, or other expansion cards. The unlocked multiplier is another point in its favor for users who plan to overclock. Its lower launch MSRP of $3789 compared to $4650 for the 6740P may also factor into platform decisions, though the 6740P remains the stronger performer in aggregate.

For users running heavily threaded server workloads, the 6740P is the clear choice. For users who need maximum single-thread speed, extensive PCIe expansion, or overclocking capability, the w9-3575X has specific advantages. The database record shows that the 6740P is the more versatile and higher-performing processor overall, with 14 wins out of 16 head-to-head benchmarks and a higher average benchmark score.