Intel Xeon 6780E vs Intel Xeon w9-3595X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two processors into very distinct personalities. The Intel Xeon w9-3595X takes the win in 9 of the 16 recorded tests, while the Intel Xeon 6780E wins 7. The most decisive victories for the w9-3595X come in single-threaded workloads, where it posts a score of 3720 in PassMark's single-thread test versus 1923 for the 6780E, a 48.3% advantage. That is not a small gap; it reflects a fundamentally different approach to core design and clock strategy.

In Cinebench, the w9-3595X leads across every version tested. In R15 multicore, it scores 8497 against 7431, a 12.5% lead. In R20 multicore, the margin is 35407 versus 30963, a 12.6% difference. The R23 multicore result follows the same pattern: 84304 for the w9-3595X versus 73723 for the 6780E, again a 12.6% gap. Single-core Cinebench results show the same 12.5% delta in favor of the w9-3595X across R15, R20, and R23. The PassMark multithread test also favors the w9-3595X, with 99576 versus 86734, a 12.9% edge.

The 6780E fights back hard in specialized workloads. Its most dramatic win is in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 193004 versus 92249 for the w9-3595X, an enormous 109.2% advantage. Data compression shows a 39.6% lead for the 6780E, with scores of 2557582 versus 1831962. Integer math favors the 6780E at 641817 versus 473507, a 35.5% margin. Random string sorting goes to the 6780E by 71.4%, with 326954 versus 190745. The physics test is another major win for the 6780E: 10951 versus 5842, a 87.5% lead. Floating point math also goes to the 6780E, 433862 versus 379008, a 14.5% advantage. Prime number finding favors the 6780E by 22.1%, with 708 versus 580.

The extended instructions test is the one area where the w9-3595X wins outside of the Cinebench and single-thread categories, scoring 142785 versus 114008, a 20.2% lead. This suggests the w9-3595X has stronger SIMD or specialized instruction execution capabilities for certain workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from entirely different design philosophies within Intel's lineup. The Xeon 6780E uses the Sierra Forest architecture, built on a 5 nm process node, with a die size of 578 mm². It is a 144-core, 144-thread part, meaning it operates without hyper-threading; each core is a single thread. The base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost of 3.00 GHz, and the TDP is 330 W. Its cache layout is unusual: 96 KB of L1 per core, 4 MB of L2 per module, and a shared 108 MB of L3. This design targets massive parallel throughput rather than raw single-core speed.

The Xeon w9-3595X uses the Sapphire Rapids architecture on a 10 nm process, with a multi-die design of 4x 477 mm². It has 60 cores and 120 threads, so hyper-threading is enabled. Base clock is 2.00 GHz, but the boost reaches 4.80 GHz, a substantially higher ceiling. TDP is 385 W. Cache configuration differs as well: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core (not per module), and 112.5 MB of L3. The w9-3595X is multiplier unlocked, while the 6780E is locked.

Both use DDR5 memory with an eight-channel bus, but the 6780E has a higher memory bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s versus 307.2 GB/s for the w9-3595X. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ: the 6780E provides 88 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the w9-3595X provides 112 Gen 5 lanes. Sockets are different: the 6780E sits in Intel Socket 4710, the w9-3595X in Intel Socket 4677. The 6780E launched on 2024-06-02, while the w9-3595X launched on 2024-08-23.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Xeon 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads. The Xeon w9-3595X has 60 cores and 120 threads. The 6780E has more physical cores, but the w9-3595X uses hyper-threading to double its thread count per core.

Q: Why does the w9-3595X win in Cinebench despite having fewer cores?

A: The w9-3595X has a much higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus 3.00 GHz for the 6780E. In Cinebench multicore tests, the w9-3595X leads by roughly 12.5% across R15, R20, and R23. The higher clock speed and per-core L2 cache help it overcome the core count disadvantage in these specific workloads.

Q: Where does the 6780E show its biggest advantage?

A: The 6780E dominates in data encryption, scoring 109.2% higher than the w9-3595X. It also wins big in random string sorting (71.4% ahead), physics (87.5% ahead), and data compression (39.6% ahead). These are throughput-heavy tasks that scale well with core count.

Q: Is the w9-3595X better for single-threaded performance?

A: Yes, the data is clear. In PassMark single-thread, the w9-3595X scores 3720 versus 1923 for the 6780E, a 48.3% lead. Single-core Cinebench results also favor the w9-3595X by 12.5% across all three versions tested.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: Both have eight-channel DDR5 memory and ECC support. The 6780E has higher memory bandwidth at 409.6 GB/s compared to 307.2 GB/s for the w9-3595X. The w9-3595X offers more PCIe lanes: 112 Gen 5 lanes versus 88 Gen 5 lanes for the 6780E.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The w9-3595X boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the 6780E boosts to 3.00 GHz. That 1.80 GHz difference is the primary driver of the w9-3595X's single-thread and Cinebench wins.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6780E | Intel Xeon w9-3595X |

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

| Cores | 144 | 60 |

| Threads | 144 | 120 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 330 W | 385 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4710 | Intel Socket 4677 |

| Architecture | Sierra Forest | Sapphire Rapids |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 578 mm² | 4x 477 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 4 MB (per module) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 108 MB (shared) | 112.5 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 307.2 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | 88 Gen 5 | 112 Gen 5 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $11350 | $5889 |

| Release Date | 2024-06-02 | 2024-08-23 |

| Part Number | SRPG3 | SRN71 |

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two different tools. The Xeon 6780E is a massive parallel throughput machine. Its 144 cores and higher memory bandwidth make it the winner in 7 of the 16 benchmarks, with particularly strong showings in encryption, compression, physics, and integer math. If your workload is about moving and transforming data at scale, this is the choice.

The Xeon w9-3595X is the better all-around performer in general-purpose benchmarks. It wins 9 of 16 tests, including all Cinebench versions and the PassMark multithread test. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock and 112.5 MB of L3 cache give it a decisive edge in single-threaded work, where it leads by 48.3%. It also carries a lower launch MSRP of $5889 versus $11350 for the 6780E.

For builders prioritizing raw core counts for specific server-style workloads like encryption or data compression, the 6780E is the clear winner. For workstation users running a mix of rendering, general computing, and single-threaded applications, the w9-3595X offers better measured performance in more categories. The w9-3595X also has the advantage of being multiplier unlocked, which matters for overclocking-oriented builds.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Xeon 6780E wins in:

• Data encryption (109.2% ahead)
• Data compression (39.6% ahead)
• Random string sorting (71.4% ahead)
• Physics (87.5% ahead)
• Integer math (35.5% ahead)
• Floating point math (14.5% ahead)
• Prime number finding (22.1% ahead)

These are workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth. The 144-core design and 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth give it a decisive edge. If your application involves heavy data transformation, cryptographic operations, or scientific calculations that parallelize perfectly, the 6780E is the measured leader.

Intel Xeon w9-3595X wins in:

• All Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both single and multicore, 12.5% to 12.6% ahead)
• PassMark multithread (12.9% ahead)
• PassMark single-thread (48.3% ahead)
• Extended instructions (20.2% ahead)

The w9-3595X is the better choice for general-purpose workstation use. It wins in rendering benchmarks, single-threaded applications, and tasks that benefit from high clock speeds. The 4.80 GHz boost clock is a major factor, as is the 2 MB per-core L2 cache. The extended instructions win suggests better SIMD performance for vectorized code. For a mixed workload machine that handles everything from 3D rendering to daily driver tasks, the w9-3595X has the stronger benchmark profile.