Intel Xeon 674X vs Intel Xeon 676X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Xeon 676X wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Xeon 674X, taking 16 wins to zero. The most striking margins appear in PassMark's math workloads, where the core-count advantage translates into substantial performance gaps. In floating point math, the 676X scores 283570 against the 674X's 243877, a 16.3% advantage. Integer math shows a similar pattern, with the 676X at 354777 versus 308968, a 14.8% lead. These are the two largest deltas in the entire dataset, suggesting that raw computational throughput scales strongly with the additional cores.

The Cinebench results are remarkably uniform, with every iteration showing exactly an 8.2% delta in favor of the 676X. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 676X scores 7806 against 7213, while single-core shows 1101 versus 1018. The R20 run shows 32527 against 30057 for multicore and 4591 versus 4243 for single-core. Cinebench R23 continues the pattern with 77447 against 71566. The consistency of this 8.2% delta across all Cinebench tests, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, indicates that the architectural efficiency per core is effectively identical, and the multicore advantage comes purely from having more cores.

PassMark's specialized workloads paint a more varied picture. Data encryption shows a 10.5% delta, with the 676X scoring 67638 against 61195. Data compression yields a 9.7% advantage at 1355807 versus 1236272. Extended instructions show an 8.1% delta (105231 against 97373), and the multithread score reflects an 8.2% delta (91115 against 84196). Physics results show a 9.2% gap (8281 versus 7586), while random string sorting lands at 8.2% (137976 versus 127529). The narrowest margin is in PassMark's single-thread test, where the 676X leads by just 2.1%, scoring 4015 against 3933. This smaller delta is logical: single-thread performance depends on clock speed and microarchitecture, not core count, and both processors share the same 4.90 GHz boost clock and Granite Rapids architecture.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Granite Rapids family, built on Intel's 5 nm process with a dual-die design measuring 2x 598 mm². They share the same Intel Socket 4710, the same 144 MB of shared L3 cache, and the same per-core L1 and L2 cache allocations of 112 KB and 2 MB respectively. Memory support is identical as well, with DDR5, an eight-channel memory bus, and 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory and offer PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU. Neither includes integrated graphics, and both target the server and workstation market segment.

The core configuration is where the two diverge. The 676X packs 32 cores with 64 threads, while the 674X has 28 cores with 56 threads. That is a difference of 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clocks also differ: the 676X runs at 2.80 GHz, while the 674X has a higher base clock of 3.00 GHz. The boost clocks are identical at 4.90 GHz. The higher base clock on the 674X partially compensates for fewer cores in lightly threaded workloads, which explains why the single-core Cinebench delta is still 8.2% rather than larger: the 674X's higher base clock narrows the gap that the core count would otherwise create.

The thermal design points are close but not equal, with the 676X rated at 275 W and the 674X at 270 W. Both have unlocked multipliers, and both were released on the same date. The part numbers are SA2CY for the 676X and SA2CZ for the 674X. The launch MSRP is $2499 for the 676X and $2199 for the 674X. The 676X carries a 98th percentile ranking among all CPUs, matching the 674X's 98th percentile, despite the 676X having a higher average benchmark score of 158540 against 143103.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows that the 676X is the outright winner in every measured workload, but the magnitude of the advantage varies by task type. For compute-heavy mathematical workloads, the 676X's edge is largest, with floating point and integer math showing the biggest deltas. This suggests that tasks like scientific simulation, financial modeling, and numerical analysis will see the most benefit from the additional cores. The 16.3% floating point advantage and 14.8% integer advantage are the standout figures in the entire comparison.

For encryption and compression workloads, the 676X also holds a clear lead, with 10.5% and 9.7% deltas respectively. These workloads often scale well with core count, so the 4-core difference translates into meaningful throughput gains for database operations, file compression pipelines, and secure communication tasks.

The single-thread advantage is much smaller at 2.1%, which means that legacy software or lightly threaded applications will see only a modest improvement from the 676X. The identical boost clock of 4.90 GHz ensures that peak single-core performance is similar, though the 676X still edges ahead. For workloads that are primarily single-threaded, the 674X's higher base clock of 3.00 GHz helps it remain competitive, and the 5 W lower TDP makes it slightly more efficient in those scenarios.

The Cinebench results, which are uniform at 8.2% across all versions, indicate that rendering and 3D modeling workloads will see a consistent advantage from the 676X. This is a predictable result for multi-threaded rendering tasks that scale linearly with core count.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon 676X has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Xeon 674X has 28 cores and 56 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock on both processors?

A: Both the Intel Xeon 676X and the Intel Xeon 674X have a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: Both processors have 144 MB of shared L3 cache, along with the same 112 KB per-core L1 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark floating point math, where the 676X leads by 16.3%, scoring 283570 against the 674X's 243877.

Q: Is there any workload where the 674X wins?

A: Based on the recorded benchmark data, the 674X does not win any of the 16 head-to-head comparisons. The 676X wins all of them.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The 676X has an average benchmark score of 158540, while the 674X has an average score of 143103.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon 676X is the superior processor in every measured dimension. Its 32 cores deliver consistent advantages across all benchmark categories, with the largest gains in floating point (16.3%) and integer math (14.8%). For workloads that rely heavily on parallel computation, particularly scientific computing, financial analysis, and data processing, the 676X provides a clearly measurable performance uplift.

The 674X is not without merit. Its higher base clock of 3.00 GHz helps narrow the single-thread gap to just 2.1%, and its 5 W lower TDP makes it slightly more power-efficient. The 674X also carries a lower launch MSRP of $2199 compared to the 676X's $2499. For environments where power consumption is tightly constrained or where the workload is dominated by single-threaded applications, the 674X may be the more appropriate choice. The 8.2% delta in Cinebench single-core tests, however, shows that even in lightly threaded scenarios, the 676X still holds an advantage.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The 676X sits within 1.1% of the AMD EPYC 9355P, within 2.1% of the AMD EPYC 7663, and within 2.4% of the AMD EPYC 9375F, while leading the Intel Xeon 6745P by 2.4%. The 674X, by contrast, is nearly tied with the Intel Xeon 6732P (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D (0.4% behind), the Intel Xeon w9-3575X (0.8% behind), and the AMD EPYC 7643P (1.2% behind). This places the 676X in a higher competitive tier, directly contesting AMD's EPYC 9000 series, while the 674X competes with mid-range server parts.

For buyers who need maximum multi-threaded throughput and are willing to accept the higher TDP and price, the 676X is the clear pick. The 674X makes sense for those who want Granite Rapids features with slightly lower power draw and a lower entry point, but the benchmark data shows that the 674X sacrifices meaningful performance in exchange for those savings.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 676X | Intel Xeon 674X |

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

| Cores | 32 | 28 |

| Threads | 64 | 56 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 275 W | 270 W |

| Part Number | SA2CY | SA2CZ |

| Launch MSRP | $2499 | $2199 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 158540 | 143103 |

All other specifications are identical: 5 nm process, Granite Rapids architecture, Intel Socket 4710, 2x 598 mm² die size, 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 144 MB shared L3, DDR5 memory support, eight-channel memory bus, 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes, no integrated graphics, server/workstation market segment, active production status, and an unlocked multiplier.