Xeon Gold 5217 vs Xeon W-10885M

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.

Xeon Gold 5217 vs Xeon W-10885M 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.

Xeon Gold 5217 vs Xeon W-10885M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon Gold 5217

2019

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-10885M across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (15,429 vs 15,486).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (11 MB vs 16 MB).
❌5650% higher power demand at 115W vs 2W.

Xeon W-10885M

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+45.5% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 11 MB).
✅Draws 2W instead of 115W, a 113W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-10885M better than Xeon Gold 5217?

Yes. Xeon W-10885M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 16.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon W-10885M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 16.5% 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, Xeon W-10885M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 45.5% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 11 MB).

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

Xeon W-10885M still makes the most sense overall. Xeon W-10885M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 16.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon W-10885M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2019), 45.5% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 11 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Xeon Gold 5217 vs Xeon W-10885M Technical Specifications

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

Xeon Gold 5217

The Xeon Gold 5217 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 11 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 115 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2667. Passmark benchmark score: 15,429 points. Launch price was $1,522.

Xeon W-10885M

The Xeon W-10885M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Comet Lake-H (2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1440. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 15,486 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Xeon Gold 5217 and Xeon W-10885M share an identical 8-core/16-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Xeon Gold 5217 versus 5.1 GHz on the Xeon W-10885M — a 31.8% clock advantage for the Xeon W-10885M (base: 3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Xeon Gold 5217 uses the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon W-10885M uses Comet Lake-H (2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon Gold 5217 scores 15,429 against the Xeon W-10885M's 15,486 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon W-10885M. L3 cache: 11 MB on the Xeon Gold 5217 vs 16 MB on the Xeon W-10885M.

Feature	Xeon Gold 5217	Xeon W-10885M
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	8 / 16
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz	5.1 GHz+38%
Base Clock	3 GHz+25%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	11 MB	16 MB+45%
L2 Cache	8 MB+300%	2 MB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)	Comet Lake-H (2020)
PassMark	15,429	15,486
Geekbench 6 Single	1,041	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	8,232	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon Gold 5217 uses the LGA3647 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W-10885M uses BGA1440 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon Gold 5217	Xeon W-10885M
Socket	LGA3647	BGA1440
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2667	—
Max RAM Capacity	1024 GB	—
RAM Channels	6	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	48	—