Core Ultra 9 275HX vs Xeon W-3365

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.

Core Ultra 9 275HX vs Xeon W-3365 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 9 275HX vs Xeon W-3365: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 9 275HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 55W instead of 270W, a 215W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics, while Xeon W-3365 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 48 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3365, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3365

2021

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 275HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (16,817 vs 17,908).
❌Launch MSRP is still $3,499 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 275HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌390.9% higher power demand at 270W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 275HX moves to FCBGA2114 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 275HX better than Xeon W-3365?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon W-3365 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 9 275HX is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 9 275HX is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 16.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 9 275HX is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.5% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 24 cores and 24 threads.

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

Core Ultra 9 275HX is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon W-3365 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core Ultra 9 275HX comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $3,499 MSRP, and it still gives you a 16.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon W-3365 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core Ultra 9 275HX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2021), a healthier platform with FCBGA2114 and DDR5 instead of LGA4189, and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 24 threads instead of 32/64. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 9 275HX vs Xeon W-3365 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 9 275HX

The Core Ultra 9 275HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 56,018 points. Launch price was $600.

Xeon W-3365

The Xeon W-3365 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-07-29. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 48 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 57,312 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 275HX packs 24 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon W-3365 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the Xeon W-3365 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 275HX versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3365 — a 29.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 275HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon W-3365 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 56,018 against the Xeon W-3365's 57,312 — a 2.3% lead for the Xeon W-3365. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,835 vs 1,960, a 36.5% lead for the Core Ultra 9 275HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 17,908 vs 16,817 (6.3% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX). L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 275HX vs 48 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3365.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 275HX	Xeon W-3365
Cores / Threads	24 / 24	32 / 64+33%
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+35%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	48 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+200%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-70%	10 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	56,018	57,312+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,835+45%	1,960
Geekbench 6 Multi	17,908+6%	16,817

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 9 275HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3365 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 9 275HX versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon W-3365 — the Core Ultra 9 275HX supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3365 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 256 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 9 275HX) vs 8 (Xeon W-3365). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 9 275HX) vs 64 (Xeon W-3365) — the Xeon W-3365 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM870,WM880 (Core Ultra 9 275HX) and Intel C621A (Xeon W-3365).

Feature	Core Ultra 9 275HX	Xeon W-3365
Socket	FCBGA2114	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+100%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	4096 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	64+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 9 275HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3365 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 9 275HX) vs true (Xeon W-3365). The Core Ultra 9 275HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics), while the Xeon W-3365 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 9 275HX targets High-End Gaming Laptop. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 9 275HX rivals Ryzen 9 9955HX; Xeon W-3365 rivals EPYC 7543.