AMD Opteron 3280 vs Intel Core i7-2670QM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly in favor of the AMD Opteron 3280 across every recorded Cinebench test. The Opteron wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 1.1% to 1.3%. The Intel Core i7-2670QM does not win any of the compared tests, but it has additional Geekbench results in the database that the Opteron lacks, so its profile is broader even if its Cinebench scores trail slightly.

For multi-core workloads, the Opteron 3280 leads in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. Its R15 multi-core score of 324 beats the Intel part's 320 by 1.3%, the largest single delta in the comparison. The R20 multi-core result is 1350 against 1334, a 1.2% edge. The R23 multi-core result is 3215 against 3177, again 1.2%. These margins are small but consistent, meaning the Opteron maintains a slight throughput advantage across different versions of the same rendering workload.

For single-core workloads, the Opteron also leads, though by the narrowest margins. Its R20 single-core score of 190 beats the Intel's 188 by 1.1%. The R23 single-core result is 453 against 448, also 1.1%. The consistency of these single-core wins is notable because the Intel chip has a higher architectural reputation for per-thread performance, but the recorded data shows the Opteron ahead in every Cinebench single-core test.

The Intel Core i7-2670QM has a meaningful data advantage in scope: it includes Geekbench multi-core and single-core scores of 1646 and 556 respectively. The Opteron 3280 has no Geekbench entries in the database. This means the Intel part can be evaluated across a wider set of benchmark categories, while the Opteron's analysis rests entirely on Cinebench results.

The percentile rankings are identical: both CPUs sit at the 31st percentile among all recorded CPUs. The average benchmark scores are close as well, with the Opteron at 1106 and the Intel at 1096. The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce this parity. The Opteron's closest competitor is the AMD Athlon X4 845 at exactly the same average score of 1106. The Intel's closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-2710QE at 1096, also a zero delta.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 scores 3215 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core i7-2670QM scores 3177. The Opteron leads by 1.2%.

Q: Are the two CPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes. Both the AMD Opteron 3280 and the Intel Core i7-2670QM are recorded at the 31st percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-2670QM have any benchmark win over the Opteron?

A: In the head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Intel chip does not win any of the five recorded comparisons. However, the database includes Geekbench scores for the Intel part only, with a multi-core score of 1646 and single-core score of 556, so those results have no direct Opteron counterpart.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Opteron 3280 has an average benchmark score of 1106, and the Core i7-2670QM has an average of 1096, a 10-point gap in favor of the AMD part.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 has 8 cores, while the Intel Core i7-2670QM has 4 cores. Both support 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 has a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, compared to 3.10 GHz for the Intel Core i7-2670QM.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is remarkably uniform. The AMD Opteron 3280 wins every recorded Cinebench comparison, but the margins never exceed 1.3%. This suggests the two chips perform at essentially the same level in rendering workloads, with the Opteron holding a small but repeatable edge.

The largest win for the Opteron comes in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 324 against 320. That 1.3% delta is the widest gap in the entire comparison. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Opteron scores 1350 against 1334, a 1.2% margin. The R23 multi-core test shows 3215 against 3177, also 1.2%. These multi-core results are consistent across three generations of the Cinebench workload, which strengthens the conclusion that the Opteron's 8-core configuration delivers slightly more sustained throughput than the Intel's 4-core, 8-thread design.

The single-core tests follow the same pattern but with even smaller gaps. The Opteron scores 190 in Cinebench R20 single-core versus 188 for the Intel part, a 1.1% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Opteron scores 453 against 448, again 1.1%. The fact that the Opteron wins single-core tests despite having a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz for the Intel part, and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz versus 3.10 GHz, indicates that the clock advantage is enough to overcome any architectural differences.

The Intel Core i7-2670QM does have Geekbench results that are not available for the Opteron. Its Geekbench multi-core score is 1646, and its single-core score is 556. These numbers cannot be directly compared to the Opteron because no Geekbench data exists for the AMD chip in the database. Still, they provide a reference point for the Intel part's performance outside of Cinebench.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The Opteron averages 1106, while the Intel averages 1096. The nearest rivals for each chip confirm their competitive tier: the Opteron matches the AMD Athlon X4 845 exactly at 1106, and the Intel part matches the Intel Core i7-2710QE exactly at 1096. The Opteron's other rivals, the AMD Opteron 4280 and AMD PRO A12-8870, sit at 1107, just 0.1% higher, while the AMD PRO A12-9800 sits at 1104, 0.2% lower. The Intel's other rivals follow the same pattern: the Core i5-3470S at 1095 is 0.1% lower, the AMD PRO A10-8850B at 1098 is 0.1% higher, and the Core i7-4610M at 1094 is 0.2% lower.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Opteron 3280 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i7-2670QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Opteron's base clock is 2.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz for the Intel part, and its boost clock is 3.50 GHz versus 3.10 GHz. The Opteron has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel has a lower TDP of 45 watts, reflecting its mobile design.

The sockets are entirely different. The Opteron uses AMD Socket AM3+, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). The Intel chip includes integrated graphics in the form of Intel HD 3000, whereas the Opteron's integrated graphics are listed as "On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)", meaning the graphics capability is not part of the CPU itself.

Memory specifications also differ. The Opteron supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Intel part supports dual-channel memory but has no recorded memory type or bandwidth in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The Opteron has PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel part has no recorded PCIe generation.

The market segments differ as well. The Opteron is classified as a Desktop processor, while the Core i7-2670QM is classified as Mobile. Both are end-of-life products. The Opteron has a launch MSRP of $229, while the Intel part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Opteron's part number is OS3280OLW8KGU, and the Intel's is SR02N. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Opteron was released in March 2012, while the Intel part was released in October 2011.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The AMD Opteron 3280 uses the K10 architecture with the Zurich codename, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core i7-2670QM uses the Sandy Bridge architecture, also on a 32 nm process, but fabricated by Intel. Both chips use 32 nm nodes, but the transistor counts and die sizes differ.

The Opteron contains 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. The Intel part contains 1,160 million transistors on a smaller 216 mm² die. The Opteron's larger die and higher transistor count align with its 8-core design, while the Intel part fits 4 cores into a more compact area.

Cache configurations are structured differently. The Opteron has 384 KB of L1 cache, 8 MB of L2 cache, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Opteron's total L2 cache is larger in absolute terms, with 8 MB of L2 and 8 MB of L3, while the Intel part's per-core L2 cache totals 1 MB across 4 cores and its L3 totals 6 MB.

The Opteron is part of the Opteron 3000 series, specifically the Opteron (Zurich generation). The Intel part belongs to the Core i7 (Sandy Bridge generation, no series name). The Opteron's socket is AMD Socket AM3+; the Intel's socket is Intel Socket G2 (988B). The Intel's integrated graphics presence, Intel HD 4000, is a notable feature difference, while the Opteron's graphics capability depends on the motherboard chipset. The Opteron supports DDR3 memory with a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, and PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel part has no recorded memory type, memory bandwidth, or PCIe generation in the database. Neither supports ECC memory, and both are end-of-life products. The Opteron's launch MSRP is $229, and the Intel part has no launch MSRP. The Opteron was released in March 2012, and the Intel part was released in October 2011, and both have a 32 nm process node.

Neither chip has ECC memory support, and both have dual-channel memory buses. The Opteron's memory bandwidth is recorded at 29.9 GB/s, while the Intel's memory bandwidth is not recorded. The Opteron has PCIe Gen 2 support, the Intel's PCIe is not recorded. The Opteron's integrated graphics are listed as "On certain motherboards (Chipset feature", but the Intel's integrated graphics are Intel HD 3000. The Opteron's part number is OS3280OLW8KGU, and the Intel's part number is SR02N. The Opteron is unlocked: the multiplier is not unlocked, and the Intel's multiplier is also not unlocked. The Opteron has a base clock of 2.50 GHz, the Intel has a base clock of 2.20 GHz, the Opteron boosts to 3.50 GHz, and the Intel boosts to 3.10 GHz.

The transistor counts are close: 1,200 million for the Opteron, 1,160 million for the Intel, a 40 million transistor difference in favor of the AMD part. The die size difference is larger: 315 mm² versus 216 mm², a 99 mm² gap. The Opteron's L1 cache is 384 KB, the Intel's L1 cache is 64 KB per core, and the Opteron's L2 is 8 MB, the Intel's L2 is 256 KB per core, and the Opteron's L3 is 8 MB shared, the Intel's L3 is 6 MB shared.

The Verdict

The data points to a narrow but consistent win for the AMD Opteron 3280 in Cinebench workloads. It wins all five head-to-head tests, with deltas between 1.1% and 1.3%, and its average benchmark score of 1106 edges out the Intel Core i7-2670QM's 1096. The Opteron's 8-core, 8-thread configuration, higher clock speeds, and larger cache pool give it a measurable advantage in multi-core rendering, while its single-core results show that the clock speed advantage also carries over to lighter workloads.

The Intel Core i7-2670QM is not without merit in the recorded data. It has the same 31st percentile ranking among all CPUs, a lower TDP of 45 watts, and a mobile market classification that makes it suitable for laptop systems. Its Geekbench scores of 1646 multi-core and 556 single-core provide additional reference points that the Opteron lacks. Buyers looking for a mobile processor with integrated graphics, specifically Intel HD 3000, would find the Intel part more appropriate.

However, on pure benchmark performance in Cinebench, the Opteron is the winner. Its wins are small, never exceeding 1.3%, but they are uniform across R15, R20, and R23. The Opteron's launch MSRP of $229 places it in the desktop segment, and its 65 watt TDP reflects a higher power envelope than the Intel's 45 watt mobile chip.

The choice depends on the use case. The Opteron 3280 suits desktop builds where multi-core Cinebench performance is the priority and the slightly higher power draw is acceptable. The Core i7-2670QM suits mobile platforms where the 45 watt TDP, integrated graphics, and Geekbench-verified performance matter more. For anyone prioritizing Cinebench scores alone, the Opteron 3280 is the better pick, but the margins are so thin that the Intel part remains a viable alternative, especially where portability and graphics capability are required.