Intel Xeon 6741P vs Intel Xeon w9-3595X Comparison

The Intel Xeon w9-3595X and Intel Xeon 6741P are both 99th-percentile server/workstation processors, yet they deliver nearly identical overall performance despite very different designs. The w9-3595X posts an average benchmark score of 209,881, while the 6741P trails at 194,901. In direct head-to-head testing, the two chips split the 16 benchmark comparisons exactly evenly at eight wins apiece, making this a genuine toss-up that comes down to workload characteristics rather than raw dominance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the entire comparison is the passmark_physics test, where the Intel Xeon 6741P scores 13,890 against the w9-3595X's 5,842. That is a staggering 57.9% advantage for the 6741P, the largest delta in either direction. Similarly, in passmark_find_prime_numbers, the 6741P more than doubles the w9-3595X, scoring 1,242 versus 580, a 53.3% lead. These two results suggest the 6741P's architecture handles certain integer-heavy and physics-simulation workloads with far greater efficiency.

The w9-3595X, however, strikes back decisively in single-threaded performance. In passmark_single_thread, it scores 3,720 against the 6741P's 3,195, a 16.4% advantage. This is the largest win for the w9-3595X and highlights its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus the 6741P's 3.80 GHz. The w9-3595X also leads in passmark_random_string_sorting by 7.6% (190,745 versus 177,322) and in passmark_floating_point_math by 5.7% (379,008 versus 358,423). Data encryption favors the w9-3595X by 2.8% (92,249 versus 89,746), and integer math shows a 3.4% edge (473,507 versus 458,058). The margins are narrower in data compression (0.9%) and extended instructions (0.1%), but the w9-3595X takes both.

Interestingly, the Cinebench suite tells a different story. Across all five Cinebench tests—R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core—the 6741P wins by a consistent 1.5%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 6741P scores 85,561 versus 84,304 for the w9-3595X. The same pattern holds for R20 multi-core (35,935 versus 35,407) and R15 multi-core (8,624 versus 8,497). Single-core results follow suit: R23 single-core shows 12,079 for the 6741P (the w9-3595X does not have a corresponding score listed), R20 single-core 5,073 versus 4,998, and R15 single-core 1,217 versus 1,199.

The passmark_multithread test lands in the 6741P's column as well, with a score of 100,660 versus 99,576, a 1.1% edge. This brings the final tally to eight wins each, but the distribution of those wins matters more than the count. The 6741P dominates in physics and prime-number finding by enormous margins, while the w9-3595X wins in single-threaded and floating-point workloads by smaller but still meaningful amounts. When averaging all benchmark scores, the w9-3595X holds a 7.7% overall advantage over the 6741P, per the nearestRivals data.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: choose the Intel Xeon w9-3595X if your workloads prioritize single-threaded responsiveness, floating-point math, encryption, or random string sorting. Its 16.4% lead in passmark_single_thread and 5.7% lead in floating-point math make it the stronger pick for interactive workstation tasks and scientific computing that leans on scalar or floating-point performance. The w9-3595X also offers 60 cores and 120 threads versus the 6741P's 48 cores and 96 threads, yet it still manages to win in several multi-threaded tests like data compression and integer math. Its unlocked multiplier further positions it as the more flexible processor for those who want to push beyond stock settings.

Choose the Intel Xeon 6741P if your workloads are heavy on physics simulation, prime-number finding, or Cinebench-style rendering. The 57.9% advantage in passmark_physics and 53.3% advantage in passmark_find_prime_numbers are not marginal differences—they represent fundamental architectural strengths. The 6741P also sweeps every Cinebench test by 1.5%, which indicates better sustained multi-core rendering performance despite having fewer cores. Its 288 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to the w9-3595X's 112.5 MB, likely contributes to these wins in cache-sensitive workloads.

The average benchmark score favors the w9-3595X by 7.7%, but that aggregate hides the lopsided individual results. Users running physics engines or prime-number calculations would experience a 50% or greater performance penalty with the w9-3595X, which is unacceptable for those specific tasks. Conversely, users needing maximum single-thread speed would find the 6741P's 16.4% deficit hard to stomach. There is no universal winner; the correct choice depends entirely on the application mix.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3595X has an average benchmark score of 209,881, which is 7.7% higher than the Intel Xeon 6741P's 194,901.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the passmark_physics test?

A: The Intel Xeon 6741P leads by 57.9% in passmark_physics, scoring 13,890 against the w9-3595X's 5,842.

Q: Which chip wins in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3595X wins passmark_single_thread by 16.4%, scoring 3,720 versus the 6741P's 3,195.

Q: Do the two processors differ in core count?

A: Yes. The Intel Xeon w9-3595X has 60 cores and 120 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6741P has 48 cores and 96 threads.

Q: What are the Cinebench R23 multi-core scores for each?

A: The Intel Xeon 6741P scores 85,561 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, beating the w9-3595X's 84,304 by 1.5%.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon 6741P has 288 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon w9-3595X has 112.5 MB.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their core specifications. The Intel Xeon w9-3595X offers 60 cores and 120 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6741P provides 48 cores and 96 threads. Base clocks favor the 6741P at 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for the w9-3595X, but the boost clock reverses the order: the w9-3595X reaches 4.80 GHz against the 6741P's 3.80 GHz. Thermal design power also differs, with the w9-3595X rated at 385 W and the 6741P at 300 W.

The memory subsystems show notable differences despite both supporting DDR5 across eight channels. The w9-3595X has a memory bandwidth of 307.2 GB/s, while the 6741P reaches 409.6 GB/s. PCIe lane counts differ as well: the w9-3595X provides Gen 5 with 112 lanes (CPU only), whereas the 6741P offers Gen 5 with 136 lanes (CPU only). The sockets are incompatible—the w9-3595X uses Intel Socket 4677, and the 6741P uses Intel Socket 4710. The w9-3595X has an unlocked multiplier, while the 6741P is locked. Release dates also differ: the w9-3595X launched on 2024-08-23, and the 6741P on 2025-02-23. The launch MSRP for the w9-3595X is $5889, and for the 6741P it is $4421. Part numbers are SRN71 for the w9-3595X and SRVEY for the 6741P.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these chips is substantial. The Intel Xeon w9-3595X uses the Sapphire Rapids codename from the Xeon W generation, built on a 10 nm process with a die size of 4x 477 mm². The Intel Xeon 6741P belongs to the Granite Rapids family (Xeon 6, Granite Rapids-SP), fabricated on a 5 nm node with a die size of 2x 598 mm². Both are manufactured by Intel, but the newer 5 nm process gives the 6741P a density advantage that likely explains its higher base clock and lower TDP despite fewer cores.

Cache hierarchies differ in structure and size. The w9-3595X features 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with a total L3 of 112.5 MB. The 6741P has 112 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, but its L3 expands to 288 MB shared across the chip. This 2.5x difference in L3 capacity is the most pronounced architectural gap and correlates with the 6741P's dominance in physics and prime-number workloads, which often rely on large working sets. Both chips support ECC memory and have no integrated graphics, targeting the same server/workstation market segment. The w9-3595X's higher boost clock and unlocked multiplier suggest it is designed for maximum single-thread flexibility, while the 6741P's larger cache and newer node indicate a focus on throughput in cache-heavy, parallel workloads.