Ryzen 9 9900X vs Xeon W-3375

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3375
2021
38 cores / 76 threads, 270 Watt
38.61
+7.9%

Xeon W-3375 outperforms Ryzen 9 9900X by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking86108
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data63.88
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency13.0427.19
Architecture codenameIce Lake-W (2021)Granite Ridge (2024)
Release date29 July 2021 (3 years ago)15 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 cores3812 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads7624
Base clock speed2.5 GHz4.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache57 MB (shared)64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data2x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)83 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data16,630 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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
SocketFCLGA4189AM5
Power consumption (TDP)270 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX-512SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
SGX-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5
Maximum memory size4 TBno data
Max memory channels8no data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X.

PCIe version45.0
PCI Express lanes6424

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.

Xeon W-3375 38.61
+7.9%
Ryzen 9 9900X 35.78

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.

Xeon W-3375 59091
+7.9%
Ryzen 9 9900X 54752

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 38.61 35.78
Recency 29 July 2021 15 August 2024
Physical cores 38 12
Threads 76 24
Chip lithography 10 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 270 Watt 120 Watt

Xeon W-3375 has a 7.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 216.7% more physical cores and 216.7% more threads.

Ryzen 9 9900X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 150% more advanced lithography process, and 125% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X.

Be aware that Xeon W-3375 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 9 9900X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3375 and Ryzen 9 9900X, 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 Xeon W-3375
Xeon W-3375
AMD Ryzen 9 9900X
Ryzen 9 9900X

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.


3.5 27 votes

Rate Xeon W-3375 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 114 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 9900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3375 or Ryzen 9 9900X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.