CPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Opteron 4386 wins all multi-core benchmarks in the head-to-head data. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2782 against the A10-9700E's 2762, a 0.7% lead. The Opteron also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core (1168 vs 1160) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (280 vs 278), each by 0.7%.

Q: How does the A10-9700E compare in single-core performance?

A: The A10-9700E trails in every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Opteron 4386 scores 392 versus the A10-9700E's 390, a 0.5% difference. The gap is slightly larger in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Opteron leads 164 to 163 (0.6%).

Q: What is the core and thread configuration difference?

A: The Opteron 4386 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the A10-9700E has 4 cores and 4 threads. This is a 2x difference in core count, yet the benchmark scores are remarkably close, indicating the A10-9700E's Excavator architecture delivers much higher per-core efficiency.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Opteron 4386 has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, compared to the A10-9700E's 3.50 GHz. The base clocks are closer: 3.10 GHz for the Opteron versus 3.00 GHz for the A10-9700E.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Neither processor supports ECC memory according to the data. Both list ECC memory as false, despite the Opteron being marketed for the Server/Workstation segment.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The Opteron 4386 has a TDP of 95 watts, while the A10-9700E is rated at 35 watts. This makes the A10-9700E significantly more power-efficient, with less than half the thermal envelope of the Opteron.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a one-sided picture: the AMD Opteron 4386 wins all five head-to-head benchmarks. However, the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.5% to 0.7%. The largest win for the Opteron comes in multi-core tests, where it leads by 0.7% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core. Single-core wins are slightly smaller, at 0.5-0.6%.

The A10-9700E does not win any benchmark outright, but its performance profile suggests a different use case. With a 35-watt TDP versus the Opteron's 95 watts, the A10-9700E delivers nearly identical scores while consuming far less power. The A10-9700E also includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, which the Opteron lacks entirely.

For raw compute across all tested workloads, the Opteron 4386 is the pick. For systems where power consumption and integrated graphics matter, the A10-9700E offers comparable CPU performance in a much more efficient package. The Opteron's server-oriented design (Socket C32, DDR3 support) targets legacy server platforms, while the A10-9700E's AM4 socket and DDR4 support align with modern desktop builds.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different AMD generations and designs. The Opteron 4386 uses the Piledriver architecture on a 32 nm process node, with the codename "Seoul." It belongs to the Opteron 4000 series and is built on a 315 mm² die containing 1,200 million transistors. The A10-9700E uses the newer Excavator architecture on a 28 nm node, with the codename "Bristol Ridge." Its die is smaller at 250 mm² but packs 3,100 million transistors, a much higher density.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Opteron 4386 has 384 KB of L1 cache, 8 MB of L2 cache, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The A10-9700E has 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache at all. Despite having 4x the L2 cache and a large L3 cache, the Opteron only manages a marginal performance lead, highlighting how efficient the Excavator cores are in the A10-9700E.

Memory support diverges completely. The Opteron uses DDR3 memory, while the A10-9700E supports DDR4 with dual-channel operation and a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The A10-9700E also features PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Opteron's PCIe support is not listed. The A10-9700E integrates Radeon R7 graphics; the Opteron has no integrated graphics. The Opteron is manufactured without a listed foundry, while the A10-9700E is built by GlobalFoundries.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 8 (Opteron 4386) vs 4 (A10-9700E)
• Threads: 8 vs 4
• Base Clock: 3.10 GHz vs 3.00 GHz
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz vs 3.50 GHz
• TDP: 95 W vs 35 W
• Socket: AMD Socket C32 vs AMD Socket AM4
• Architecture: Piledriver vs Excavator
• Codename: Seoul vs Bristol Ridge
• Process Node: 32 nm vs 28 nm
• Foundry: Not listed vs GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: 1,200 million vs 3,100 million
• Die Size: 315 mm² vs 250 mm²
• L1 Cache: 384 KB vs 320 KB
• L2 Cache: 8 MB vs 2 MB
• L3 Cache: 8 MB (shared) vs None
• Memory Support: DDR3 vs DDR4
• Memory Bus: Not listed vs Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: Not listed vs 38.4 GB/s
• PCIe: Not listed vs Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated Graphics: None vs Radeon R7
• Market Segment: Server/Workstation vs Desktop
• Release Date: 2012-12-03 vs 2017-07-26

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Opteron 4386 sweeps the benchmark suite, but the margins are almost negligible. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 280 against the A10-9700E's 278, a 0.7% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the same pattern: 1168 versus 1160, again 0.7%. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows suit with 2782 versus 2762, a 0.7% lead.

Single-core results are even tighter. Cinebench R20 single-core gives the Opteron a 164 to 163 win, a 0.6% margin. Cinebench R23 single-core has the Opteron at 392 and the A10-9700E at 390, a 0.5% difference. These results are consistent across all tests, with the Opteron's advantage shrinking slightly in single-threaded workloads.

The average benchmark scores reflect this near-parity. The Opteron 4386 has an average benchmark score of 957, while the A10-9700E sits at 951. In percentile rankings, the Opteron places in the 26th percentile of all CPUs, and the A10-9700E places in the 25th. The Opteron's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-950 (average score 957, 0% delta), AMD Athlon X4 870K (956, 0.1% delta), AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 (958, -0.1% delta), and Intel Xeon W3550 (956, 0.1% delta). The A10-9700E's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-5500U (953, -0.2% delta), Intel Xeon W3570 (955, -0.4% delta), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U (947, 0.4% delta), and Intel Celeron N5105 (955, -0.4% delta).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 4386 wins every single test, but the victories are so narrow that they are almost within measurement noise. A 0.5% to 0.7% lead across all Cinebench tests means the two processors are functionally equivalent in CPU throughput. The Opteron's 8 cores do not translate into a meaningful advantage over the A10-9700E's 4 cores because the Excavator architecture in the latter is substantially more efficient per core.

The decision comes down to platform and system-level considerations. The Opteron 4386 targets the Server/Workstation segment with Socket C32 and DDR3 memory support. It was released in 2012 and has a 95-watt TDP. The A10-9700E is a Desktop part released in 2017, uses the modern AM4 socket, supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, and includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics. Its 35-watt TDP is less than half the Opteron's.

For users building a new system, the A10-9700E is the rational choice based on the data: it matches the Opteron's performance within 1%, supports newer memory technology, includes integrated graphics, and consumes dramatically less power. For users maintaining or upgrading a legacy Socket C32 server platform, the Opteron 4386 offers identical performance with the same platform compatibility. The data shows no scenario where the Opteron's extra cores, larger cache, or higher clock speeds deliver a tangible benefit over the A10-9700E. The A10-9700E's production status is listed as Active, while the Opteron's production status is not specified, another data point favoring the newer desktop part.