PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Xeon 6737P

2025

Why buy it

✅+132.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+47.7% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 98 MB).
✅Draws 270W instead of 340W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w9-3575X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.9 vs 21.8 PassMark/$ ($4,995 MSRP vs $3,789 MSRP).

Xeon w9-3575X

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,206 less on MSRP ($3,789 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅Delivers 36.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.8 vs 15.9 PassMark/$ ($3,789 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅27.3% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (19,320 vs 45,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (98 MB vs 144 MB).
❌25.9% higher power demand at 340W vs 270W.

Xeon 6737P

2025

Xeon w9-3575X

2024

Why buy it

✅+132.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+47.7% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 98 MB).
✅Draws 270W instead of 340W, a 70W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,206 less on MSRP ($3,789 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅Delivers 36.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.8 vs 15.9 PassMark/$ ($3,789 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅27.3% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w9-3575X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.9 vs 21.8 PassMark/$ ($4,995 MSRP vs $3,789 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (19,320 vs 45,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (98 MB vs 144 MB).
❌25.9% higher power demand at 340W vs 270W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 6737P better than Xeon w9-3575X?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Xeon w9-3575X is ahead with a 18.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6737P pulls ahead with 132.9% better Geekbench multi-core. Xeon 6737P also has the bigger cache pool with 47.7% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 98 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6737P is the better fit. You are getting 132.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 47.7% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 98 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon 6737P is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon w9-3575X makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon 6737P is 31.8% more expensive on MSRP at $4,995 MSRP versus $3,789 MSRP, and it gives you 132.9% better Geekbench multi-core. The trade-off is that Xeon w9-3575X is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 18.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon w9-3575X is also 36.6% better value on MSRP (21.8 vs 15.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Xeon 6737P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024), 47.7% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 98 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 44/88. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Xeon 6737P Benchmark Check

Xeon w9-3575X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
1080p
low	190 FPS	316 FPS
medium	166 FPS	306 FPS
high	132 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	106 FPS	207 FPS
1440p
low	156 FPS	274 FPS
medium	132 FPS	237 FPS
high	101 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	83 FPS	157 FPS
4K
low	71 FPS	186 FPS
medium	63 FPS	159 FPS
high	49 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	108 FPS

Open Xeon 6737P Open Xeon w9-3575X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
1080p
low	520 FPS	384 FPS
medium	460 FPS	332 FPS
high	376 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	309 FPS	236 FPS
1440p
low	425 FPS	308 FPS
medium	383 FPS	273 FPS
high	321 FPS	232 FPS
ultra	256 FPS	190 FPS
4K
low	262 FPS	181 FPS
medium	239 FPS	162 FPS
high	212 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	176 FPS	133 FPS

Open Xeon 6737P Open Xeon w9-3575X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
1080p
low	883 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	813 FPS	1086 FPS
high	768 FPS	1020 FPS
ultra	677 FPS	875 FPS
1440p
low	756 FPS	1009 FPS
medium	692 FPS	913 FPS
high	650 FPS	839 FPS
ultra	581 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	510 FPS	605 FPS
medium	429 FPS	521 FPS
high	383 FPS	465 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	400 FPS

Open Xeon 6737P Open Xeon w9-3575X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
1080p
low	985 FPS	1162 FPS
medium	886 FPS	1015 FPS
high	766 FPS	915 FPS
ultra	665 FPS	814 FPS
1440p
low	806 FPS	941 FPS
medium	701 FPS	823 FPS
high	604 FPS	727 FPS
ultra	519 FPS	638 FPS
4K
low	582 FPS	688 FPS
medium	521 FPS	613 FPS
high	462 FPS	551 FPS
ultra	397 FPS	437 FPS

Open Xeon 6737P Open Xeon w9-3575X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Xeon 6737P and Xeon w9-3575X

Xeon 6737P

The Xeon 6737P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 144 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 79,634 points. Launch price was $4,995.

Xeon w9-3575X

The Xeon w9-3575X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 44 cores and 88 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 97.5 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 340 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 82,507 points. Launch price was $3,789.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon 6737P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon w9-3575X offers 44 cores / 88 threads — the Xeon w9-3575X has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Xeon 6737P versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w9-3575X — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Xeon w9-3575X (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Xeon 6737P uses the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture (Intel 3 nm), while the Xeon w9-3575X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon 6737P scores 79,634 against the Xeon w9-3575X's 82,507 — a 3.5% lead for the Xeon w9-3575X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,000 vs 2,300, a 14% lead for the Xeon w9-3575X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 45,000 vs 19,320 (79.9% advantage for the Xeon 6737P). L3 cache: 144 MB (total) on the Xeon 6737P vs 97.5 MB on the Xeon w9-3575X.

Feature	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	44 / 88+38%
Boost Clock	4 GHz	4.8 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+32%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	144 MB (total)+48%	97.5 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 3 nm-57%	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)	Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
PassMark	79,634	82,507+4%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	60,000
Geekbench 6 Single	2,000	2,300+15%
Geekbench 6 Multi	45,000+133%	19,320

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon 6737P uses the LGA4710 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon w9-3575X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6400 memory speed. Both support up to 4096 GB of RAM. Both feature 8-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 88 (Xeon 6737P) vs 112 (Xeon w9-3575X) — the Xeon w9-3575X offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: C741 (Xeon 6737P) and W790 (Xeon w9-3575X).

Feature	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
Socket	LGA4710	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB	4096 GB
RAM Channels	8	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	88	112+27%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Xeon w9-3575X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6737P) vs true (Xeon w9-3575X). Primary use case: Xeon 6737P targets High Performance Server. Direct competitor: Xeon 6737P rivals EPYC 9005; Xeon w9-3575X rivals Ryzen Threadripper 7970X.

Feature	Xeon 6737P	Xeon w9-3575X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	High Performance Server	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Xeon 6737P launched at $4995 MSRP, while the Xeon w9-3575X debuted at $3789. On MSRP ($4995 vs $3789), the Xeon w9-3575X is $1206 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon 6737P delivers 15.9 pts/$ vs 21.8 pts/$ for the Xeon w9-3575X — making the Xeon w9-3575X the 30.9% better value option.