AMD Athlon 200GE vs AMD Opteron 6328 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Opteron 6328 across every recorded test, though the margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 454 against the Athlon 200GE's 350, a 22.9% advantage. That same 22.9% gap appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Opteron posts 1894 versus 1461. The pattern continues in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 4510 for the Opteron, 3479 for the Athlon, again a 22.9% delta.

Single-core results tell a similar story but with a slightly smaller margin. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Opteron leads 267 to 206, a 22.8% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 636 versus 491, also a 22.8% gap. The consistency of these deltas across both multi-core and single-core workloads suggests the performance advantage is structural rather than workload-specific. The Opteron does not merely scale better with more cores; it wins by nearly the same proportion even when only one core is active.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The Opteron 6328 sits at 1304, while the Athlon 200GE averages 1261. That places the Opteron in the 35th percentile of all CPUs in the database, just ahead of the Athlon's 34th percentile. Interestingly, the nearest rivals for each chip confirm how close their overall standings are. The Athlon's closest competitor, the Intel Core i7-3615QM, matches it exactly at 1260 average score with a 0% delta, while the Opteron's nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-6400, sits at 1307, only 0.2% ahead of the Opteron's 1304.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial and explains much of their benchmark behavior. The Athlon 200GE uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the Opteron 6328 relies on the older Piledriver architecture on a 32 nm process, also from GlobalFoundries. The Athlon's codename is Zen (Raven Ridge), and it belongs to the Athlon generation built on that microarchitecture. The Opteron's codename is Abu Dhabi, part of the Opteron 6000 series generation.

Core counts differ sharply. The Athlon has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Opteron has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Opteron packs four times the physical cores, though it does not support simultaneous multithreading. The Athlon compensates with its 2 cores and 4 threads via SMT. The base clocks are identical at 3.20 GHz, but the Opteron adds a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, a feature the Athlon lacks entirely.

Cache hierarchies are built on different philosophies. The Athlon provides 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 4 MB of shared L3. The Opteron lists 384 KB of L1 total, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Opteron's dual-die design is visible in its die size of 2x 315 mm² and 2,400 million transistors, whereas the Athlon uses a single die of 209.8 mm² with 4,950 million transistors. The Athlon's smaller die packs more transistors per square millimeter, a direct benefit of the 14 nm node versus 32 nm.

Memory support diverges completely. The Athlon uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron uses DDR3 with a quad-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron also supports ECC memory, while the Athlon does not. PCIe capabilities differ as well: the Athlon offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Opteron provides Gen 2 without a lane count specified. The Athlon includes integrated Radeon Vega 3 graphics; the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all.

The Verdict

The data points to different buyers for each chip. The Opteron 6328 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database, with consistent 22.8% to 22.9% advantages across both single-core and multi-core tests. Its 8 physical cores and higher boost clock give it a clear edge in raw throughput. The Opteron's 35th percentile standing versus the Athlon's 34th percentile, combined with its higher average score of 1304 versus 1261, makes it the stronger performer in absolute terms.

However, the Athlon 200GE is a desktop part with a 35 W TDP, whereas the Opteron 6328 is a server/workstation chip with a 115 W TDP. The Athlon uses the modern Zen architecture on 14 nm, supports DDR4, and includes integrated graphics. The Opteron uses the older Piledriver architecture on 32 nm, supports DDR3 and ECC memory, and requires a discrete GPU. The Athlon remains in active production, while the Opteron is end-of-life.

For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness in a modern desktop context, the Athlon's Zen architecture and 14 nm process represent a newer design, though the benchmark data does not show it winning any recorded test. For users who need maximum multi-core throughput and ECC memory support in a server environment, the Opteron's 8 cores and quad-channel DDR3 make it the data-backed choice. The launch MSRP for the Athlon 200GE was $55, while the Opteron 6328 launched at $575, but the benchmark results favor the Opteron regardless of price considerations.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Athlon 200GE has 2 cores and 4 threads; the Opteron 6328 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Both have a 3.20 GHz base clock, but the Opteron adds a 3.80 GHz boost clock while the Athlon has none. TDP is 35 W for the Athlon versus 115 W for the Opteron. The Athlon uses AMD Socket AM4; the Opteron uses AMD Socket G34.

The Athlon is built on Zen at 14 nm, with a 209.8 mm² die and 4,950 million transistors. The Opteron uses Piledriver at 32 nm, with a dual-die design of 2x 315 mm² and 2,400 million transistors. Cache configurations differ: the Athlon has 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core with 4 MB shared L3; the Opteron has 384 KB total L1, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die.

Memory support splits along generational lines. The Athlon uses DDR4 with dual-channel access and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth; the Opteron uses DDR3 with quad-channel access and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Opteron. PCIe generation differs: Gen 3 with 8 lanes for the Athlon, Gen 2 for the Opteron. The Athlon has Radeon Vega 3 integrated graphics; the Opteron has none. Market segments also differ: Desktop for the Athlon, Server/Workstation for the Opteron. Production status is Active for the Athlon and End-of-life for the Opteron. Release dates are 2018-09-05 for the Athlon and 2012-11-04 for the Opteron. The multiplier is locked on both.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 6328 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Athlon 200GE has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does the Athlon 200GE support ECC memory?

A: No. The Athlon 200GE does not support ECC memory. The Opteron 6328 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Opteron 6328 scores 636 versus the Athlon 200GE's 491, a 22.8% advantage for the Opteron. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the same margin: 267 versus 206.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Athlon 200GE includes Radeon Vega 3 integrated graphics. The Opteron 6328 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Opteron 6328 has an average benchmark score of 1304, placing it in the 35th percentile of all CPUs. The Athlon 200GE averages 1261, placing it in the 34th percentile.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The Athlon 200GE supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron 6328 supports DDR3 with a quad-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The Opteron 6328 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its 8 physical cores and 3.80 GHz boost clock drive consistent 22.8% to 22.9% leads over the Athlon across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests. The Opteron also wins on memory bandwidth with 59.7 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s, and it is the only one of the two with ECC memory support. For server or workstation workloads that can use eight threads and require memory reliability, the Opteron is the clear choice.

The Athlon 200GE wins on efficiency and platform modernity. Its 35 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Opteron's 115 W. It uses the newer Zen architecture on a 14 nm process, supports DDR4, and includes Radeon Vega 3 integrated graphics, which eliminates the need for a separate GPU in basic desktop builds. The Athlon also has a smaller die at 209.8 mm² versus the Opteron's 2x 315 mm², and it remains in active production while the Opteron is end-of-life. The Athlon's PCIe Gen 3 support with 8 lanes is newer than the Opteron's Gen 2.

The benchmark database does not record a single test where the Athlon 200GE outperforms the Opteron 6328. Users who need the fastest recorded performance in Cinebench workloads should choose the Opteron. Users who prioritize a modern desktop platform with integrated graphics, lower power consumption, and DDR4 support should choose the Athlon, accepting that its benchmark scores are consistently lower. The Opteron's 34th versus 35th percentile gap is narrow, but every measured result favors the older server chip.