AMD Athlon X4 845 vs AMD Opteron 4280 Comparison
AMD Athlon X4 845
Opteron 4280
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Athlon X4 845 vs AMD Opteron 4280
The AMD Opteron 4280 and AMD Athlon X4 845 are both end-of-life processors from AMD, but they target completely different segments. The Opteron 4280 is a server/workstation part from the Opteron 4000 series, built on the 32 nm Bulldozer architecture (Valencia codename). The Athlon X4 845 is a desktop chip using the 28 nm Excavator architecture (Carrizo codename). Despite their different origins, the benchmark data shows they are incredibly close in overall performance, with the Opteron 4280 achieving an average benchmark score of 1107 and the Athlon X4 845 scoring 1106. In the included head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Opteron 4280 wins all five rounds, but the real story is in how the architectures achieve similar results with very different specifications.
The Verdict
The data clearly favors the AMD Opteron 4280 for any workload that can use more than four cores. It wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with margins between 18.8% and 19.2% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core and single-core tests. If your priority is raw processing power for multi-threaded server tasks, rendering, or heavy computational work, the Opteron 4280 is the stronger choice. Its 8 cores and 8 threads give it a significant structural advantage over the Athlon X4 845's 4 cores and 4 threads.
However, the AMD Athlon X4 845 is not without merit. It operates at a much lower TDP of 65 watts compared to the Opteron's 95 watts, making it a more power-efficient option for a desktop build. It also has a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz, compared to the Opteron's 2.80 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. For single-threaded tasks that are not heavily reliant on core count, the Athlon's higher clock speeds and newer Excavator architecture help it stay competitive, though it still loses in the provided single-core benchmarks. Choose the Opteron 4280 for maximum multi-threaded performance in a server context. Choose the Athlon X4 845 if you are building a desktop system where lower power consumption and a modern FM2+ socket are more important than raw core count.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The AMD Opteron 4280 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Athlon X4 845 has 4 cores and 4 threads.
Q: How much faster is the Opteron 4280 in multi-core workloads?
A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Opteron 4280 scores 3828, which is 19.1% higher than the Athlon X4 845's score of 3215. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Opteron scores 1607, a 19% advantage over the Athlon's 1350.
Q: Does the Athlon X4 845 win in any benchmark?
A: No. The head-to-head data shows the AMD Opteron 4280 winning all 5 benchmark comparisons, leaving the AMD Athlon X4 845 with 0 wins.
Q: What is the difference in power consumption?
A: The AMD Opteron 4280 has a TDP of 95 watts, while the AMD Athlon X4 845 has a considerably lower TDP of 65 watts.
Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?
A: Yes, the AMD Opteron 4280 supports ECC memory. The AMD Athlon X4 845 does not support ECC memory.
Q: What are the socket requirements for each chip?
A: The AMD Opteron 4280 uses the AMD Socket C32, while the AMD Athlon X4 845 uses the AMD Socket FM2+.
Architecture Differences
The two processors represent distinct generations of AMD design. The Opteron 4280 is built on the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Valencia, and uses a 32 nm process node from GlobalFoundries. It features a massive 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy includes a 384 KB L1 cache and an 8 MB L2 cache, supplemented by an 8 MB shared L3 cache. This design focuses on high core counts for server workloads.
In contrast, the Athlon X4 845 uses the newer Excavator architecture, codenamed Carrizo. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process, also by GlobalFoundries, and packs 3,100 million transistors onto a smaller 250 mm² die. The cache configuration is notably different: it has a 320 KB L1 cache and a 2 MB L2 cache, with no L3 cache at all. The Excavator architecture is designed for higher clock speeds and better power efficiency in desktop applications. The Athlon X4 845 also features a PCIe Gen 3 interface with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Opteron 4280 is limited to PCIe Gen 2. The Athlon's multiplier is unlocked, allowing for overclocking, whereas the Opteron's multiplier is locked.
Specification Differences
The specification sheets for these two CPUs show clear divergence in their target markets. The most obvious difference is the core count: the Opteron 4280 has 8 cores and 8 threads, double the 4 cores and 4 threads of the Athlon X4 845. Clock speeds also differ, with the Athlon X4 845 having a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, compared to the Opteron 4280's 2.80 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. The Opteron 4280 has a TDP of 95 watts, while the Athlon X4 845 is rated for 65 watts.
The memory controllers differ as well. Both support DDR3 and dual-channel memory, but the Opteron 4280 has a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the Athlon X4 845 has a higher memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Opteron 4280 supports ECC memory for server-grade reliability, a feature absent from the Athlon X4 845. Their sockets are incompatible: the Opteron 4280 uses AMD Socket C32, and the Athlon X4 845 uses AMD Socket FM2+. The Opteron 4280 has an L3 cache of 8 MB shared, while the Athlon X4 845 has no L3 cache. The Opteron 4280 was released in 2011 with a launch MSRP of $255. The Athlon X4 845 was released in 2016 and has no launch MSRP listed. Both parts are end-of-life.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The benchmark results are remarkably consistent across all tests, showing a uniform performance gap between the two processors. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron 4280 scores 385 against the Athlon X4 845's 324, a difference of 18.8%. This pattern repeats in the newer Cinebench R20 multi-core test, where the Opteron 4280 scores 1607 and the Athlon X4 845 scores 1350, a 19% advantage. The trend continues in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with the Opteron 4280 achieving 3828 and the Athlon X4 845 achieving 3215, marking a 19.1% lead.
The single-core results are just as decisive, which is surprising given the Athlon X4 845's higher clock speeds. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Opteron 4280 scores 226, beating the Athlon X4 845's 190 by 18.9%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Opteron 4280 scores 540 against the Athlon X4 845's 453, a winning margin of 19.2%. Across all five head-to-head tests, the Opteron 4280 wins by a margin that hovers tightly between 18.8% and 19.2%. This suggests the Opteron's larger cache hierarchy and different architecture provide a consistent, scalable advantage in Cinebench workloads, regardless of thread count. The Athlon X4 845's higher clock speeds and Excavator architecture are not enough to overcome the Opteron 4280's design.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Opteron 4280 wins in every measured benchmark. Its victories are not narrow; they are consistent double-digit leads across both multi-core and single-core tests. The data indicates that the Opteron 4280 is the superior performer for applications that rely on Cinebench-style rendering, which benefits from its 8 cores, 8 threads, and robust 8 MB L3 cache. It is the clear choice for a server or workstation environment where the 95-watt TDP is acceptable and ECC memory support is required for data integrity. The socket C32 platform, while older, provides a pathway to a true multi-core server processor with a 31st percentile ranking among all CPUs.
The AMD Athlon X4 845 wins on platform efficiency and modern features. While it loses all benchmarks, it does so while consuming significantly less power, with a TDP of 65 watts. This makes it a better fit for a compact desktop build where thermals and power draw are primary concerns. Its 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher than the Opteron's 25.6 GB/s, and its PCIe Gen 3 support offers faster data transfer for compatible devices. The unlocked multiplier allows for user-driven overclocking, which could help close the gap in single-threaded tasks. The Athlon X4 845 is the better choice if you are building a desktop system on the FM2+ platform and prioritize lower power consumption and modern connectivity over raw multi-core performance. It also achieves a 31st percentile ranking, matching the Opteron 4280 in overall standing, showing that its lower core count does not relegate it to a significantly lower performance class in the broader CPU landscape.