CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split personality between these two Intel Xeon 6 processors. The Intel Xeon 6774P, a Granite Rapids part, dominates in 10 of the 14 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Xeon 6780E, a Sierra Forest chip, claims 4 victories. The most striking pattern is in the Cinebench suite: the 6774P wins all three multicore tests by exactly 30%, Cinebench R15 (9660 vs 7431), R20 (40251 vs 30963), and R23 (95836 vs 73723). This consistent 30% margin across three different rendering workloads suggests a fundamental throughput advantage, not a workload-specific quirk.

The 6774P also exhibits a massive single-thread advantage. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3047 against 1923 for the 6780E, a 58.5% lead. This gap is even more pronounced in the prime number search test, where the 6774P wins by 78.5% (1264 vs 708). The extended instructions benchmark shows a 55.5% victory for the 6774P (177273 vs 114008), indicating its core architecture is substantially better at handling modern instruction sets. Physics simulation also favors the 6774P by 46.3% (16023 vs 10951), while floating-point math shows a narrower but still positive 7.2% margin (465314 vs 433862).

However, the 6780E fights back in specific memory and data-intensive workloads. Its most dramatic win is in data encryption, where it scores 193004 versus 115025, a 40.4% advantage for the Sierra Forest chip. Data compression shows a 9.7% edge for the 6780E (2557582 vs 2309868), and random string sorting favors it by 19.7% (326954 vs 262417). The integer math test also goes to the 6780E, with a 7.5% lead (641817 vs 593440). These wins suggest that the 6780E's higher core count and different cache topology translate into tangible gains for data manipulation tasks.

The multithread benchmark mirrors the Cinebench results, with the 6774P winning by 30% (112749 vs 86734). This consistency across different multithreaded workloads reinforces the idea that the 6774P's per-core performance advantage more than compensates for the 6780E's numerical core superiority in many scenarios. The data compression result is particularly interesting, despite the 6780E having more than double the cores, it only manages a 9.7% win there, while losing badly in other multithreaded tests.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy that depends on workload type. For users running Cinebench-style rendering, physics simulations, or any workload heavily reliant on per-core throughput, the Intel Xeon 6774P is the definitive choice. Its 30% lead across all three Cinebench versions and 46.3% advantage in physics leave no ambiguity. The 58.5% single-thread victory further cements this position for latency-sensitive or lightly threaded applications.

Conversely, the Intel Xeon 6780E demonstrates its strengths in data compression, encryption, and string sorting, tasks where its massive core count and larger L2 cache per module pay dividends. The 40.4% encryption win is the largest margin in either direction, suggesting the 6780E has a specialized advantage for security-focused workloads. The benchmark results indicate that the 6780E's 144 cores (versus 64 for the 6774P) can be leveraged effectively, but only in workloads that scale well with raw thread count and benefit from the different cache architecture.

The 6774P wins 10 of 14 head-to-head tests, including all the rendering and general-purpose workloads. The 6780E wins 4 tests, all in the PassMark data-processing family. For a mixed workload environment, the 6774P's broader dominance makes it the safer recommendation, but organizations with heavy encryption or compression demands should seriously consider the 6780E. Both processors sit at the 99th percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close, 300372 for the 6774P versus 280438 for the 6780E, but the distribution of wins tells a more nuanced story.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies within Intel's Xeon 6 lineup. The 6774P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, while the 6780E employs Sierra Forest. Both are built on Intel's 5 nm process node and use the same Intel Socket 4710, but their internal designs diverge sharply.

Granite Rapids is a performance-core design, evidenced by its 64 cores and 128 threads, a 2:1 thread-to-core ratio enabled by hyperthreading. Sierra Forest, in contrast, is an efficiency-core architecture with 144 cores and 144 threads, meaning no hyperthreading at all. This explains why the 6774P can achieve substantially higher single-thread performance despite having fewer cores. The 6774P also has a higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 2.20 GHz) and boost clock (3.90 GHz vs 3.00 GHz), reinforcing its per-core speed advantage.

The cache hierarchy differs significantly. The 6774P provides 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the 6780E offers 96 KB of L1 per core and 4 MB of L2 per module. The L3 cache presents the starkest contrast: the 6774P has 336 MB shared, versus 108 MB shared for the 6780E. This threefold L3 advantage for the 6774P likely contributes to its dominance in physics and extended instruction workloads, where large working sets benefit from ample shared cache.

Die size also tells a story. The 6774P uses a dual-die design totaling 2x 598 mm², while the 6780E uses a single 578 mm² die. The 6774P's larger total silicon area accommodates its performance-oriented core design and massive L3 cache. The 6780E achieves its core count on a smaller die, consistent with the efficiency-core philosophy that prioritizes density over per-core resources.

Specification Differences

Beyond architecture, several specifications distinguish these two processors. The 6774P has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads, a core count advantage of 80 for the 6780E, but a thread count advantage of 16 for the 6774P. The 6774P runs at 2.50 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost, compared to 2.20 GHz and 3.00 GHz for the 6780E. Thermal design power favors the 6780E at 330W versus 350W for the 6774P, despite the former having more cores, a testament to the efficiency-core design.

PCIe lane allocation differs notably: the 6774P provides 136 lanes of Gen 5, while the 6780E offers 88 lanes. This 48-lane difference could matter for systems with many high-bandwidth peripherals or GPUs. The 6774P has a larger L3 cache (336 MB vs 108 MB) and more L1 cache per core (112 KB vs 96 KB). The L2 cache is organized differently: 2 MB per core for the 6774P versus 4 MB per module for the 6780E.

Memory support is identical: both use DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC. Neither has integrated graphics, and both are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). The 6774P was released on 2025-05-21, while the 6780E launched earlier on 2024-06-02. The part numbers are SRWPC for the 6774P and SRPG3 for the 6780E. The 6774P has a launch MSRP of $6760; the 6780E has a launch MSRP of $11350.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon 6780E has 144 cores, compared to 64 cores for the Intel Xeon 6774P. However, the 6774P has 128 threads versus 144 threads for the 6780E, because the 6774P supports hyperthreading while the 6780E does not.

Q: Why does the 6774P win Cinebench multicore by exactly 30% in all three versions?

A: The consistent 30% margin across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suggests a systematic per-core performance advantage for the 6774P. Its higher boost clock (3.90 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) and larger L3 cache (336 MB vs 108 MB) likely combine to deliver this uniform throughput edge in rendering workloads.

Q: In which workloads does the 6780E outperform the 6774P?

A: The 6780E wins in data encryption (40.4% ahead), random string sorting (19.7% ahead), data compression (9.7% ahead), and integer math (7.5% ahead). These are all PassMark data-processing benchmarks where the 6780E's 144 cores can be fully utilized.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The 6774P scores 3047 in PassMark single-thread, which is 58.5% higher than the 6780E's 1923. This is the second-largest margin in either direction, after the encryption test.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 6774P has an average benchmark score of 300372, which is roughly 7% higher than the 6780E's 280438. Both are at the 99th percentile of all CPUs. The 6774P's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 9734, which is 3.3% ahead, while the 6780E's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X, which is 0.2% behind.

Q: Do they use the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both support DDR5 with an eight-channel memory bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC memory. The memory subsystem is identical, so any performance differences are not attributable to memory bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Xeon 6774P wins in: Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore (30% each), PassMark multithread (30%), PassMark single-thread (58.5%), PassMark physics (46.3%), PassMark extended instructions (55.5%), PassMark find prime numbers (78.5%), and PassMark floating-point math (7.2%). This processor is the clear choice for rendering, simulation, scientific computing, and any workload with high per-core demands. Its massive 336 MB L3 cache and higher clock speeds make it suitable for data-heavy applications that benefit from large shared caches. The 6774P also provides more PCIe lanes (136 vs 88), making it better suited for systems with many expansion cards or accelerators.

Intel Xeon 6780E wins in: PassMark data encryption (40.4%), PassMark random string sorting (19.7%), PassMark data compression (9.7%), and PassMark integer math (7.5%). This processor is optimal for data processing pipelines, encryption/decryption services, compression algorithms, and integer-heavy workloads. Its 144 cores provide substantial parallel throughput for these tasks, despite the lower clock speeds. The 6774P's 350W TDP versus the 6780E's 330W also makes the 6780E slightly more power-efficient per core, though both are high-power server parts. For organizations running database compression, secure communications, or large-scale data transformation, the 6780E's specialized wins could translate into meaningful real-world performance gains, even though it loses the overall benchmark count 4 to 10.