AMD Opteron 3280 vs Intel Core i7-2710QE Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Opteron 3280 compare to the Intel Core i7-2710QE in multi-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Opteron 3280 scores 3215 against 3186 for the i7-2710QE, a 0.9% advantage. The gap is similar in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Opteron scores 1350 versus 1338, again 0.9% ahead.

Q: Which processor wins in single-core tests?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 leads in all recorded single-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 190 versus 188 for the Intel part, a 1.1% edge. In R23 single-core, the Opteron scores 453 versus 449, a 0.9% margin.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor, and how do they rank overall?

A: The Opteron 3280 has an average benchmark score of 1106, and the i7-2710QE averages 1106 as well. The nearest rival to the Opteron is the AMD Athlon X4 845 with an identical average score of 1106, while the Intel chip matches the Intel Core i7-2670QM at 1096. Both processors sit at the 31st percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How do their core and thread counts differ?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 has 8 physical cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i7-2710QE has 4 physical cores but 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. This means the Opteron has twice as many physical cores, but both processors present 8 logical threads to the operating system.

Q: What are the thermal design power (TDP) ratings for these two chips?

A: The AMD Opteron 3280 is rated at 65 watts TDP, while the Intel Core i7-2710QE is rated at 45 watts TDP. Despite the lower TDP, the Intel chip achieves near-identical benchmark scores.

Q: What are the release dates and market segments for these processors?

A: The Opteron 3280 was released on March 19, 2012, and is classified as a desktop part. The i7-2710QE was released on January 2, 2011, and is classified as a mobile part. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data presents a close contest between two very different designs. The AMD Opteron 3280 emerges as the winner in all five recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons, but the margins are extremely narrow: every victory falls between 0.9% and 1.1%. The Opteron 3280 leads by 0.9% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (324 vs 321), 0.9% in R20 multi-core (1350 vs 1338), 1.1% in R20 single-core (190 vs 188), 0.9% in R23 multi-core (3215 vs 3186), and 0.9% in R23 single-core (453 vs 449).

For a workload that is heavily multi-threaded, the Opteron 3280’s 8 physical cores versus the Intel’s 4 cores with 8 threads produce virtually the same result. The Intel chip’s Hyper-Threading effectively closes the gap that physical core count would suggest. The Opteron’s higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 2.10 GHz) and boost clock (3.50 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) give it a clock speed advantage, but the Intel’s Sandy Bridge architecture apparently compensates for the clock deficit.

Users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness should favor the Opteron 3280, as it wins by 1.1% in the R20 single-core test and 0.9% in R23 single-core. This is a narrow but consistent lead. Those who care about power efficiency may prefer the Intel part, since it delivers nearly identical performance (within 1%) while consuming only 45 watts TDP compared to 65 watts TDP for the Opteron. The 20-watt difference is substantial relative to the performance delta.

The Opteron 3280 also matches its nearest rivals in the database: the AMD Athlon X4 845 scores exactly 1106, while the AMD Opteron 4280 and AMD PRO A12-8870 both score 1107 (0.1% higher). The Intel i7-2710QE sits alongside the Intel Core i7-2670QM at 1096, with the Core i5-3470S at 1095 (0.1% lower) and the AMD PRO A10-8850B at 1098 (0.1% higher). Both processors occupy the same 31st percentile among all CPUs.

The verdict is straightforward: the AMD Opteron 3280 is the better performer across the board, but the differences are so small that real-world application variance would likely mask them. The Intel i7-2710QE is the more efficient choice for laptops or small form-factor systems due to its 45-watt TDP. The Opteron 3280, despite being a desktop part with an 8-core layout, does not deliver the multi-core dominance one might expect from having twice the physical cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show the AMD Opteron 3280 sweeping all five comparisons, but never by a significant margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 324 versus 321 for the Intel, a 0.9% lead. This test scales well with core count, yet the Opteron’s 8 cores only edge out the Intel’s 4 cores with 8 threads by a few points.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Opteron scores 1350 against 1338, again 0.9% ahead. This pattern repeats in R23 multi-core: 3215 versus 3186, also 0.9%. The consistency of the delta across different Cinebench versions suggests a stable performance relationship, not a test-specific anomaly.

Single-core results are tighter. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Opteron wins 190 versus 188, a 1.1% lead. In R23 single-core, the Opteron wins 453 versus 449, a 0.9% margin. The Opteron’s higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz compared to the Intel’s 3.00 GHz likely explains this small single-thread advantage. But the fact that the Intel chip, with a lower clock, comes within a percentage point indicates the Sandy Bridge architecture extracts more instructions per cycle than the AMD K10 architecture.

The total wins tally is 5 for the AMD Opteron 3280 and 0 for the Intel Core i7-2710QE. However, the average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 1106 for the AMD and 1096 for the Intel. The gap in average score (0.9%) is consistent with the cinebench deltas, reinforcing that the Opteron is indeed the faster chip, but only by a hair.

Looking at nearest rivals, the Opteron 3280 sits in a cluster with AMD parts: the Athlon X4 845 (1106, 0% delta), Opteron 4280 (1107, -0.1%), PRO A12-8870 (1107, -0.1%), and PRO A12-9800 (1104, +0.2%). The i7-2710QE sits in a cluster with Intel parts: i7-2675QM (1096, 0%), i5-3470S (1095, +0.1% for rival), PRO A10-8850B (1098, -0.1% for the chip), and i7-4610M (1100, -0.4%). Both chips are surrounded by competitors that effectively match their performance, so they belong to the same tier.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every foundational specification except for threads, memory bus, and ECC support. The AMD Opteron 3280 has 8 cores and 8 threads; the Intel i7-2710QE has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.50 GHz for AMD versus 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks: 3.50 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. TDP: 65 watts versus 45 watts. Sockets: AMD Socket AM3+ versus Intel Socket G2 (988B). Both are dual-channel for memory, but the Opteron lists a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure in the database.

The Opteron 3280 has a larger L3 cache: 8 MB shared, compared to the Intel’s 6 MB shared. The Opteron’s L1 is 384 KB total, while the Intel’s L1 is 64 KB per core. The L2 is 8 MB total on the Opteron, versus 256 KB per core on the Intel. The Opteron has ECC memory support listed as false, and the Intel also lists ECC as false.

Integrated graphics differ: the AMD chip has no integrated GPU, relying on “On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)” for display output, while the Intel Core i7-2710QE includes Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics.

Process technology shows both at 32 nm, but the Opteron uses 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die, while the Intel uses 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The Intel’s die is significantly smaller at 216 mm² versus 315 mm², despite a similar transistor count.

The AMD opteron has a launch MSRP of $229. The Intel has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Opteron 3280 is based on the K10 architecture, with the codename Zurich, part of the Opteron 3000 series. It is built on a 32 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The die size is 315 mm² and it contains 1,200 million transistors. The L3 cache is 8 MB shared. Memory support is DDR3 with dual-channel bus. PCIe is Gen 2. The processor is unlocked (no multiplier unlock). The part number is OS3280OLW8KGU.

The Intel Core i7-2710QE is based on the Sandy Bridge architecture, also using a 32 nm process but manufactured by Intel. The die size is 216 mm² with 1,160 million transistors. The L3 cache is 6 MB shared. The processor includes Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics. PCIe information is not listed. The memory support field is null but the memory bus is dual-channel. The part number is SR02T. The multiplier is not unlocked.

The architectural differences are stark. The K10 architecture is an older design, and the Opteron compensates with more physical cores and higher clock speeds. The Sandy Bridge architecture is a newer design from 2011, featuring a more efficient core design that allows the 4-core Intel to nearly match the 8-core AMD in raw multi-threaded performance. The Intel’s 32 nm process is from the same node generation but with a smaller die and fewer transistors, yet it achieves higher performance per transistor.

The AMD Opteron 3280’s L2 cache is 8 MB (likely per die) versus 256 KB per core for the Intel, but the Intel’s per-core L2 plus the 6 MB shared L3 is sufficient for its thread count. The AMD’s L3 is 8 MB shared, slightly larger than Intel’s 6 MB shared.

The integrated graphics difference is notable: the Intel has HD 3000 built-in, while the AMD requires a chipset-based solution. This matters for users who want a compact system without a discrete GPU, but the Opteron’s desktop market target suggests most users would pair it with a dedicated GPU.

The release dates differ: the Intel came first (January 2, 2011) and the AMD followed (March 19, 2012). Neither is currently in production; both are end-of-life. The Opteron 3280 has a launch MSRP of $243, but the Intel has no recorded MSRP, so any cost comparison is impossible.

The architecture differences explain the performance parity. The AMD relies on more cores and higher clocks, while the Intel relies on core efficiency and Hyper-Threading. The result is that the Opteron 3280 leads by 0.9-1.1% in every recorded test, but the Intel does so with a 20-watt lower TDP (45 versus 65 watts). This makes the Intel the more power-efficient choice for mobile or low-power systems, while the AMD’s higher clock and extra physical cores give it a slim performance lead for desktop workloads.

The nearest rivals confirm the parity: the Opteron 3280’s closest match is the AMD Athlon X4 845 (1106 versus 1106), while the Intel’s closest match is the Intel Core i7-2670QM (1096 versus 1096). Neither chip has a notable rival beyond a 0.2% delta, which shows how tightly these parts are grouped in the database. The 31st percentile for both indicates they sit in the lower half of all CPUs, but among their immediate peers, they are essentially tied.