Intel Xeon E-2378G vs Intel Xeon Gold 6334 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record for this pair is unusually one-sided. Across all six Cinebench tests in the database, the Intel Xeon E-2378G wins every single matchup. The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 does not record a single victory in any of the measured workloads. That gives the E-2378G a clean 6 to 0 sweep in head-to-head comparisons.

The wins are consistent in both single-threaded and multi-threaded scenarios. In single-core tests, the E-2378G leads by 3.2% in Cinebench R15, then by 3.1% in both R20 and R23. The multicore results tell the same story: 3.1% ahead in R15, R20, and R23. There is no workload category in this dataset where the Gold 6334 closes the gap or overtakes its rival.

That said, the Gold 6334 is not a weak processor in absolute terms. Its average benchmark score sits at 5043, which places it in the 60th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The E-2378G also lands in the 60th percentile, with an average score of 5199. Both chips occupy the same performance tier relative to the broader CPU landscape, even though the E-2378G consistently edges ahead in these specific Cinebench runs.

The practical takeaway from the data is that the E-2378G is the better choice for anyone whose workload mix resembles Cinebench rendering tasks. The single-core advantage of roughly 3% matters for lightly threaded applications, while the multicore advantage of roughly 3% carries over to fully threaded workloads. The Gold 6334 does not offer a counterbalancing strength anywhere in the recorded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel Xeon lineages and different process nodes. The E-2378G is built on Rocket Lake-E, using Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 276 mm². It belongs to the Xeon E-2300 series and fits into Intel Socket 1200. The Gold 6334 is an Ice Lake-SP part, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process, and uses Intel Socket 4189. The database does not list a die size for the Gold 6334.

Cache layouts differ in both capacity and structure. The E-2378G provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Gold 6334 has 64 KB of L1 per core, a larger 1 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. So the Gold 6334 has more L2 and more L3, while the E-2378G has larger L1 per core. The Gold 6334's larger L2 cache (double per core) could help in certain repeated-access patterns, but the benchmark results do not show a workload where that translates into a win.

Memory subsystems are a major differentiator. Both support DDR4 and both have ECC enabled, but the channel counts diverge sharply. The E-2378G uses a dual-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Gold 6334 uses an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a fourfold difference in theoretical memory bandwidth, which typically matters for memory-bound server workloads. The recorded Cinebench tests, however, do not appear to be bandwidth-limited, since the Gold 6334 still trails in every run.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The E-2378G provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Gold 6334 provides Gen 4 with 64 lanes. The Gold 6334 offers more than triple the PCIe lanes, which is relevant for systems with many GPUs, NVMe drives, or high-speed network adapters. The E-2378G has integrated UHD Graphics P750, while the Gold 6334 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Clock behavior presents an interesting contrast. The E-2378G has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Gold 6334 has a higher base clock at 3.60 GHz but a much lower boost clock at 3.70 GHz. That means the E-2378G can ramp far higher under turbo conditions, which likely explains its consistent single-core wins. The Gold 6334's base clock is 0.8 GHz higher, but its boost ceiling is 1.4 GHz lower. The E-2378G also carries a much lower TDP at 80 watts versus 165 watts for the Gold 6334.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test opens the comparison with the E-2378G scoring 1811 against the Gold 6334's 1757. That is a 3.1% margin. The single-core R15 run shows the E-2378G at 255 versus 247, a 3.2% lead. In both cases, the E-2378G's ability to boost to 5.10 GHz appears to be the deciding factor.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result has the E-2378G at 7549 and the Gold 6334 at 7322, again a 3.1% gap. The single-core R20 run shows 1065 versus 1033, also 3.1%. The pattern holds across the entire benchmark suite with remarkable consistency.

Cinebench R23 multicore gives the E-2378G a score of 17974 versus 17435 for the Gold 6334, a 3.1% difference. The single-core R23 run records 2537 for the E-2378G and 2461 for the Gold 6334, once more a 3.1% margin. Every one of the six tests lands in a narrow band between 3.1% and 3.2% in favor of the E-2378G.

The consistency of these deltas suggests a fundamental clock advantage rather than architectural superiority. The E-2378G's 5.10 GHz boost clock versus the Gold 6334's 3.70 GHz boost clock creates a roughly 38% theoretical turbo advantage, and the measured performance gap of about 3% reflects the fact that Cinebench workloads may not sustain maximum boost on all cores. Still, the direction of the results is unambiguous: the E-2378G wins every recorded head-to-head.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on almost every specification field in the database. Core count and thread count are identical at 8 cores and 16 threads, so that is not a differentiator. The socket is different: Intel Socket 1200 for the E-2378G, Intel Socket 4189 for the Gold 6334.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The E-2378G has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Gold 6334 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. TDP differs as well, with the E-2378G rated at 80 watts and the Gold 6334 at 165 watts.

The process node distinguishes the two: 14 nm for the E-2378G, 10 nm for the Gold 6334. The die size is listed only for the E-2378G at 276 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Gold 6334. Cache configurations differ in every level: L1 is 80 KB per core for the E-2378G versus 64 KB per core for the Gold 6334; L2 is 512 KB per core versus 1 MB per core; L3 is 16 MB shared versus 18 MB shared.

Memory channel count and bandwidth differ significantly: dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s for the E-2378G, eight-channel with 204.8 GB/s for the Gold 6334. PCIe lane count also differs: 20 lanes for the E-2378G, 64 lanes for the Gold 6334, both Gen 4. The E-2378G includes integrated UHD Graphics P750, while the Gold 6334 has no integrated graphics listed.

Release dates differ by about five months. The E-2378G was released on September 7, 2021, while the Gold 6334 was released on April 5, 2021. The E-2378G has a listed launch MSRP of $494; the Gold 6334 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both are marked as Active in production status, both are locked (no unlocked multiplier), and both target the server/workstation segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2378G has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon Gold 6334 boosts to 3.70 GHz.

Q: Does the Gold 6334 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The Gold 6334 records zero wins across all six Cinebench tests. The E-2378G wins all six.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The E-2378G supports 51.2 GB/s via a dual-channel DDR4 bus. The Gold 6334 supports 204.8 GB/s via an eight-channel DDR4 bus.

Q: Which chip has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Gold 6334 has 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the E-2378G has 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Q: Are the core counts the same?

A: Yes, both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The E-2378G is rated at 80 watts, while the Gold 6334 is rated at 165 watts.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon E-2378G as the stronger performer across every benchmark recorded in the database. It wins all six Cinebench tests, with margins between 3.1% and 3.2% in both single-core and multicore workloads. Its 5.10 GHz boost clock, compared to the Gold 6334's 3.70 GHz, appears to be the decisive factor. The E-2378G also consumes less power (80 watts versus 165 watts), which makes it the more efficient choice based on the recorded specifications.

The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 does have advantages that are not reflected in Cinebench scores. Its eight-channel memory bus provides 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, four times that of the E-2378G. Its 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes offer more than triple the expansion capability. Its larger L2 cache (1 MB per core) and L3 cache (18 MB) could help in workloads with high cache reuse. But in the measured benchmarks, none of those advantages translate into a performance win.

Buyers should choose based on workload characteristics. For general compute, rendering, and single-threaded applications, the E-2378G is the clear winner in the recorded data. For systems that need massive memory bandwidth, many PCIe devices, or high-density I/O, the Gold 6334 offers platform features that the E-2378G cannot match, even though it loses every benchmark in this comparison. The E-2378G also has integrated graphics, which may simplify bring-up in systems without a discrete GPU. The Gold 6334 requires an external graphics solution.

Both processors sit at the 60th percentile among all CPUs in the database, so they are comparable in overall standing. The E-2378G's average benchmark score of 5199 is about 3% higher than the Gold 6334's 5043. The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce this placement: the E-2378G sits within 1% of CPUs like the Core i5-13400T and Core i9-10850K, while the Gold 6334 sits within 1% of the Core i9-9820X and Core i9-12900TE. Neither chip is a performance outlier in either direction.

The final recommendation from the data is straightforward: pick the E-2378G if benchmark performance is the priority, since it wins every recorded test. Pick the Gold 6334 if the platform's memory bandwidth, PCIe lane count, and cache capacity are more important than the measured Cinebench results. The benchmark record is unambiguous about which chip computes faster, but the specification sheet shows the Gold 6334 is built for a different class of server workload.