Intel Xeon 6780E vs Intel Xeon 6980P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6780E and Intel Xeon 6980P represent two fundamentally different approaches to high-core-count server computing, and the benchmark data shows a clear, decisive split. The 6780E, a Sierra Forest part, wins the vast majority of head-to-head tests, while the 6980P, a Granite Rapids part, secures specific victories in floating-point and extended instruction workloads. The data indicates that the 6780E is the superior general-purpose and multi-threaded performer, while the 6980P is a specialist for vector-heavy math and encryption-adjacent tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the 6780E’s dominance in Cinebench tests. Across all three versions—R15, R20, and R23—the 6780E wins both multi-core and single-core tests by a consistent margin of 16.7% or 16.8%. For instance, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 6780E scores 73723 against the 6980P’s 63175, a 16.7% lead. This consistency is remarkable; it suggests the 6780E’s architectural efficiency provides a uniform advantage across rendering workloads, regardless of the specific test version. The single-core Cinebench R15 result reinforces this: 1049 for the 6780E versus 898 for the 6980P, a 16.8% delta.

The 6780E’s superiority extends beyond rendering. In PassMark’s multithread test, it scores 86734 versus 74324, another 16.7% win. Data compression shows a smaller but still significant 8.2% lead (2557582 vs 2364519). The most lopsided victory for the 6780E is in the physics test, where it scores 10951 against a meager 3350 for the 6980P—a 226.9% difference that is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. This massive gap points to a fundamental architectural advantage in handling physics simulations, likely related to how thread scheduling and core communication are managed.

The 6980P does not go down without a fight. Its most significant win is in PassMark’s extended instructions test, where it scores 214794 against 114008, a 46.9% advantage for the 6980P. This is a clear indicator that the 6980P’s cores are far more capable at executing complex, vectorized instruction sets. Furthermore, the 6980P wins floating-point math, scoring 501720 versus 433862, a 13.5% lead. This suggests that while the 6780E has more cores, the 6980P’s cores are individually stronger at heavy arithmetic calculations.

The remaining tests are closer. In integer math, the 6780E edges out the 6980P by a razor-thin 0.7% (641817 vs 637476). Data encryption also goes to the 6780E by a massive 54.1% margin (193004 vs 125246). Random string sorting is a 35.8% win for the 6780E (326954 vs 240792). Overall, the 6780E wins 14 of the 16 head-to-head tests, with the 6980P taking only the extended instructions and floating-point math tests.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark results, the 6780E is the clear winner for multi-threaded, throughput-oriented workloads. Its victories in Cinebench multi-core, PassMark multithread, data compression, data encryption, and physics indicate it is better suited for rendering farms, video encoding, database compression, and scientific simulations that scale across many cores. The 226.9% win in the physics test is particularly telling; any workload with similar physics-based calculations would see a dramatic performance uplift on the 6780E. Its 54.1% lead in data encryption also makes it the superior choice for security and cryptographic tasks.

The 6980P, conversely, is the specialist for single-threaded vector math and complex instruction processing. Its 46.9% win in extended instructions shows it can process AVX-512 or similar instruction sets much faster. The 13.5% lead in floating-point math means it is the better option for financial modeling, scientific computing with heavy FPU usage, and machine learning inference that relies on dense matrix operations. However, its 3350 score in the physics test is a severe outlier, suggesting that despite its floating-point strength, it struggles with the specific physics engine used in that benchmark, possibly due to lower thread count or clock scaling behavior.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures, which explains their divergent benchmark profiles. The 6780E uses the Sierra Forest architecture, which is designed for efficiency cores (E-cores) and massive core counts. It has 144 cores and 144 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. This is a "many-core" approach where each core is simpler but the sheer number of cores boosts parallel throughput.

The 6980P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, which is designed for performance cores (P-cores) with hyper-threading. It has 128 cores and 256 threads, indicating that each physical core supports two threads. This architecture prioritizes single-thread performance and complex instruction handling.

The cache hierarchies are also starkly different. The 6780E has an L1 cache of 96 KB per core, an L2 of 4 MB per module, and a shared L3 of 108 MB. The 6980P has a larger L1 of 112 KB per core, a 2 MB L2 per core (not per module), and a massive shared L3 of 504 MB. This 504 MB L3 cache is a defining feature of the 6980P, likely aiding its performance in workloads that benefit from large data residency, such as extended instructions and floating-point math.

The process node is the same (5 nm) for both, but the die sizes differ dramatically. The 6780E has a single die of 578 mm², while the 6980P uses three dies totaling 3x 598 mm². This multi-die design for the 6980P provides more physical area for cache and compute units, but also introduces potential inter-die communication overhead that could explain its weaker physics performance.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences beyond the benchmarks. The 6780E has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The 6980P has a lower base clock of 2.00 GHz but a much higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz. This higher boost clock likely contributes to the 6980P’s wins in single-threaded vector tests.

The 6780E has a TDP of 330 watts, while the 6980P has a TDP of 500 watts. The 6980P consumes significantly more power to achieve its higher clocks and larger cache.

The memory configurations also differ. The 6780E supports eight-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. The 6980P supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 614.4 GB/s. The 6980P’s memory subsystem is 50% wider, which could aid in bandwidth-hungry floating-point workloads.

PCIe lanes differ as well: the 6780E has 88 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the 6980P has 96 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). The sockets are incompatible: the 6780E uses Intel Socket 4710, while the 6980P uses Intel Socket 7529.

Both processors have ECC memory support and no integrated graphics. The 6780E was released on 2024-06-02, while the 6980P was released later on 2024-09-23.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Xeon 6780E is significantly faster. It wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 73723 versus 63175 for the 6980P, a 16.7% advantage.

Q: Does the 6980P have any clear strengths?

A: Yes. The 6980P wins the PassMark extended instructions test by 46.9% (214794 vs 114008) and the floating-point math test by 13.5% (501720 vs 433862). It is better for complex vectorized calculations.

Q: How do their core and thread counts differ?

A: The 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads (no hyper-threading). The 6980P has 128 cores and 256 threads (with hyper-threading).

Q: What is the difference in their L3 cache sizes?

A: The 6780E has a shared 108 MB L3 cache, while the 6980P has a much larger shared 504 MB L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The 6980P has a higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz, compared to the 6780E’s 3.00 GHz. However, the 6780E has a higher base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Q: What is the score difference in the physics test?

A: The 6780E is dramatically faster, scoring 10951 compared to the 6980P’s 3350, a 226.9% difference. This is the largest performance gap in the entire comparison.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon 6780E is the superior processor for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 14 of 16 benchmark tests, including all Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests, with margins ranging from 0.7% to 226.9%. Its consistent 16.7% lead in rendering and multithreaded tests, combined with massive wins in physics, encryption, and data compression, makes it the better choice for general-purpose server tasks, virtualization, high-performance computing, and any application that scales across many threads. The 6780E’s 144 cores and higher base clock deliver more raw throughput per watt of power (330W TDP) compared to the 6980P’s 500W TDP.

The Intel Xeon 6980P is a niche part. Its wins are confined to extended instructions and floating-point math, where its 504 MB L3 cache and 3.90 GHz boost clock shine. It is the choice for workloads that are heavily vectorized, such as certain scientific simulations, financial risk calculations, or AI inference. However, its poor physics score and lower multi-core numbers make it a poor general-purpose processor. The 6980P is also more power-hungry and uses a different socket, making platform compatibility a consideration. For most buyers, the 6780E is the clear recommendation based on the benchmark evidence alone.