OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Xeon W-11955M review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£510PassMark multi-core score:21532N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:5.0 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1787TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Xeon W-11955M Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.2/10

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 67% of models
Score components

40%

7.1

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 67% of processors
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.8

Price

â–²Better than 54%
7.1

Technical score

Technical score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 70% of models
Score components

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.3

Platform

1%

8.3

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 70%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £510
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Processors model ranking

Ranked #1 of 558 models in Processors (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Xeon W-11955M

Technical score
Technical score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 70% of models
Score components:

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.3

Platform

1%

8.3

Integrated graphics

7.1
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.8

Price

7.4
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1787
This processor uses the FCBGA1787 CPU socket, which is older than that of 71.5% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Chipset
WM590
This processor supports WM590 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 63.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5 GHz which is higher than that of 78.5% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.6 GHz which is higher than that of 65.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
21,532
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 21,532 in PassMark, which is higher than 73% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 10 nm SuperFin
This processor is built on the Intel 10 nm SuperFin foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 53% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
L2 cache
10 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 79% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
L1 cache
640 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 73.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
?
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 85.4% of processors and equal to 5.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Xeon W-11955M vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 87.7% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,532 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,532 vs 11,469
  • 97.8% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,547 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,547 vs 2,804.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 65.9% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,644 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,644 vs 5,209
  • 13.6% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 87.7% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,532 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,532 vs 11,469
  • 97.8% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,547 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,547 vs 2,804.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 13.6% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 65.9% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,644 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,644 vs 5,209
  • 24.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,191 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,191 vs 2,558
  • 31.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2021 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,021 vs 1,535
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Turbo Boost Max Technology
    3 vs 2
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • 62.2% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.67x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    24 MB vs 9 MB
  • 66.7% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (640 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    640 KB vs 384 KB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm SuperFin vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm SuperFin vs Intel 14 nm
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 2.04x more expensive
    Intel Xeon W-11955M is more expensive than the average processor (£510 vs £250).
    £510 vs £250
  • 7.3% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (190 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    190 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1787 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1787 vs FP5
  • 7 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (21 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    21 vs 28
  • 2.04x more expensive
    Intel Xeon W-11955M is more expensive than the average processor (£510 vs £250).
    £510 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1787 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1787 vs FP5
  • 7 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (21 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    21 vs 28
  • 7.3% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (190 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    190 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Xeon W-11955M

  • Supports Error Correction Code (ECC) memory for mission-critical stability
  • Strong multi-threaded performance with 8 cores and 16 threads
  • High single-core boost clock speed reaching up to 5.0 GHz
  • Compatible with professional software through certified workstation drivers
  • Includes advanced corporate features like Intel vPro and hardware virtualization
  • Supports modern interfaces including PCIe Gen 4 and Wi-Fi 6E

What customers don't like about Intel Xeon W-11955M

  • Extremely high cost compared to similar consumer-grade Core i9 processors
  • High thermal output requiring high-quality cooling solutions to avoid throttling
  • Relatively weak integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750) compared to newer AMD alternatives
  • Locked multiplier prevents easy overclocking
  • Actual performance heavily depends on the laptop manufacturer's power limit settings

Verdict

The Intel Xeon W-11955M is a high-performance 11th Gen Tiger Lake-H mobile workstation processor built on 10nm SuperFin technology, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads with a 2.6 GHz base clock and a 5.0 GHz max turbo frequency. It includes 24 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports up to 128 GB of DDR4-3200 memory, and provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. Main pros include support for Error-Correcting Code (ECC) memory, advanced vPro security and manageability features, and integrated UHD Graphics 750 with 32 execution units, making it ideal for intensive professional multitasking and 3D rendering. Cons include a relatively high 45W TDP that may lead to significant heat generation and loud fan noise in thin laptop designs, and the fact that its multi-threaded performance is now surpassed by more recent consumer-grade processors.

Compare Intel Xeon W-11955M with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Xeon W-11955M and other processors

No results found