Xeon W-3275 vs i7-3960X

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-3960X
2011
6 cores / 12 threads, 130 Watt
5.32
Xeon W-3275
2019
28 cores / 56 threads, 205 Watt
25.77
+384%

Xeon W-3275 outperforms Core i7-3960X by a whopping 384% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1170190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.3711.33
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesCore i7 (Desktop)Intel Xeon W
Power efficiency3.8711.90
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-E (2011−2013)Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
Release date14 November 2011 (13 years ago)3 June 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$861$4,449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon W-3275 has 2962% better value for money than i7-3960X.

Detailed specifications

Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)28 (Octacosa-Core)
Threads1256
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.6 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rate5 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data25
L1 cache64 KB (per core)1.75 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)28 MB
L3 cache15 MB (shared)38.5 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size435 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data76 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)67 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011FCLGA3647
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt205 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVXIntel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Identity Protection+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2933
Maximum memory size64 GB1 TB
Max memory channels46
Maximum memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s140.8 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes4064

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-3960X 5.32
Xeon W-3275 25.77
+384%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i7-3960X 8445
Xeon W-3275 40931
+385%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.32 25.77
Recency 14 November 2011 3 June 2019
Physical cores 6 28
Threads 12 56
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 205 Watt

i7-3960X has 57.7% lower power consumption.

Xeon W-3275, on the other hand, has a 384.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 366.7% more physical cores and 366.7% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon W-3275 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-3960X in performance tests.

Note that Core i7-3960X is a desktop processor while Xeon W-3275 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3960X and Xeon W-3275, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-3960X
Core i7-3960X
Intel Xeon W-3275
Xeon W-3275

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 75 votes

Rate Core i7-3960X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 6 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-3960X or Xeon W-3275, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.