AMD Opteron 3350 HE vs Intel Celeron G5920 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent picture across all five Cinebench comparisons: the AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins every single test, but by margins so narrow that they are barely outside measurement noise. The largest advantage appears in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the Opteron scores 231 against the Celeron’s 226, a 2.2% lead. That is the biggest delta in the entire head-to-head set, and it is still a small gap in absolute terms.

In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Opteron 3350 HE posts 963 points versus 945 for the Celeron G5920, a 1.9% edge. The single-core R20 result follows the same pattern: 135 to 133, a 1.5% advantage. Moving to the newer Cinebench R23 workload, the multicore test gives the Opteron 2294 points against 2252, again a 1.9% margin, and the single-core test lands at 323 versus 318, a 1.6% lead.

The database records five wins for the AMD part and zero for the Intel part. Yet the practical takeaway from these numbers is that the two processors are essentially peers in rendering workloads. A 1.5% to 2.2% difference across every benchmark suggests that neither chip has a meaningful performance advantage in Cinebench. If a user runs one of these tests repeatedly, the order of results could plausibly flip between runs on different systems, given how close the scores are.

Consider how each processor compares to its own nearest rivals in the database. The Opteron 3350 HE has an average benchmark score of 789, placing it within 0.1% of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (789) and the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 (790), and within 0.2% of the Intel Core i5-3610ME (788). The Celeron G5920, with an average score of 775, sits exactly level with the Intel Core i3-3250T, 0.1% behind the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 (776), and 0.2% behind the AMD Athlon X4 760K (777). Both chips occupy the 21st percentile of all CPUs in the database, reinforcing the point that they belong to the same performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and different design philosophies. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE is built on the K10 architecture, with the codename Delhi, and belongs to the Opteron 3000 series server and workstation lineup. It uses a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries, packs 1,200 million transistors onto a 315 mm² die, and fits the AMD Socket AM3+. The Intel Celeron G5920, by contrast, uses the Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel, fits the Intel Socket 1200, and targets the desktop segment.

Core counts differ substantially. The Opteron has four cores and four threads, while the Celeron has two cores and two threads. Base clocks also differ: the Opteron runs at 2.80 GHz with a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, while the Celeron runs at a fixed 3.50 GHz with no boost capability listed. The Opteron’s higher core count gives it the multicore edge seen in the benchmarks, while the Celeron’s higher base clock helps it stay close in single-threaded tests.

Cache layouts are quite different. The Opteron 3350 HE carries 192 KB of L1 cache, 4 MB of L2 cache, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Celeron G5920 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and only 2 MB of shared L3. The Opteron’s much larger L3 pool likely helps in workloads that reuse data, though the benchmark results suggest that the Celeron’s architectural efficiency compensates for its smaller cache.

Memory support also diverges. The Opteron uses DDR3 on a dual-channel bus with 29.9 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Celeron uses DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Celeron’s newer memory standard provides roughly 43% more theoretical bandwidth, which can matter in memory-sensitive applications. PCIe support differs as well: the Opteron uses Gen 2, while the Celeron provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics separate these parts even further. The Celeron G5920 includes Intel UHD 610 graphics, while the Opteron 3350 HE relies on a chipset feature on certain motherboards rather than a built-in GPU. That makes the Celeron a more self-contained option for basic display output, while the Opteron assumes a server or workstation platform with its own graphics solution.

The release dates are far apart. The Opteron launched in December 2012, while the Celeron arrived in April 2020. The Opteron is marked end-of-life, while the Celeron remains active in production. Both are locked multipliers, so neither offers overclocking headroom.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins all multi-core tests in the recorded data. It leads by 2.2% in Cinebench R15 multicore (231 vs 226), by 1.9% in R20 multicore (963 vs 945), and by 1.9% in R23 multicore (2294 vs 2252).

Q: Does the Intel Celeron G5920 win any single-core tests?

A: No. The Opteron 3350 HE wins both recorded single-core tests, though narrowly. It scores 135 to 133 in Cinebench R20 single-core (1.5% lead) and 323 to 318 in R23 single-core (1.6% lead).

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Opteron 3350 HE averages 789 points, placing it within 0.2% of several Intel Core 2 Extreme and Core i5 parts. The Celeron G5920 averages 775 points, essentially tied with the Intel Core i3-3250T and within 0.3% of its other nearest rivals.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has four cores and four threads. The Intel Celeron G5920 has two cores and two threads.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The Opteron 3350 HE supports DDR3 on a dual-channel bus with 29.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Celeron G5920 supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Celeron G5920 includes Intel UHD 610 graphics. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has no integrated GPU of its own; graphics depend on a chipset feature on certain motherboards.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. Core count: 4 for the Opteron, 2 for the Celeron. Thread count: 4 for the Opteron, 2 for the Celeron. Base clock: 2.80 GHz for the Opteron versus 3.50 GHz for the Celeron. The Opteron has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz; the Celeron has no boost clock listed. Thermal design power: 45 watts for the Opteron, 58 watts for the Celeron, meaning the older AMD part draws less power despite having more cores.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket AM3+ for the Opteron, Intel Socket 1200 for the Celeron. Architecture and codename differ completely: K10 with the Delhi codename versus Comet Lake. Process node: 32 nm for the Opteron, 14 nm for the Celeron. The Opteron uses GlobalFoundries as its foundry; the Celeron uses Intel. The Opteron’s die is 315 mm² with 1,200 million transistors, while the Celeron has no die size or transistor count listed.

Cache configurations differ: the Opteron has 192 KB L1, 4 MB L2, and 8 MB shared L3; the Celeron has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 2 MB shared L3. Memory support: DDR3 for the Opteron, DDR4 for the Celeron. Memory bandwidth: 29.9 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe generation: Gen 2 for the Opteron, Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes for the Celeron.

Integrated graphics: the Opteron has none, relying on a chipset feature; the Celeron has UHD 610. Market segment: server and workstation for the Opteron, desktop for the Celeron. Production status: end-of-life for the Opteron, active for the Celeron. Release dates: December 2012 versus April 2020. The Opteron has a launch MSRP of $125; the Celeron has no launch MSRP recorded. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: these are two processors from different generations that happen to perform almost identically in the recorded benchmarks. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins all five head-to-head tests, but its largest margin is just 2.2%, and most margins sit around 1.5% to 1.9%. The Intel Celeron G5920 never wins a single recorded test, yet its scores are close enough that the difference would be hard to notice in real-world use.

The Opteron’s four cores give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded workloads, and that advantage shows up consistently across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The Celeron’s higher base clock and newer architecture help it close the gap, but not enough to take a win. For users who prioritize raw multi-core rendering performance, the Opteron is the pick from these two, even though it is a much older design.

However, the Celeron has strengths that the benchmark data does not capture in the head-to-head table. It supports DDR4 memory with higher bandwidth, includes integrated UHD 610 graphics, uses a current socket, and remains in active production. The Opteron is end-of-life, uses DDR3, has no integrated graphics, and requires a server or workstation platform. Those factors matter for anyone building a system today.

The 21st percentile ranking for both processors confirms their shared position in the broader CPU landscape. Neither chip is a performance leader; both sit in the lower quarter of all CPUs in the database. The choice between them depends more on platform needs than on the small benchmark deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins in every recorded Cinebench comparison. Its four cores and four threads, combined with a 45 watt TDP, make it the better choice for multi-threaded rendering tasks where the extra cores can be utilized. The 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 3.80 GHz boost clock also support its position as the stronger compute part in this pairing. For server or workstation builds on the AM3+ platform, the data shows it is the faster option.

The Intel Celeron G5920 wins on platform modernity and practical versatility, even if it loses every benchmark. Its DDR4 support with 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth, Gen 3 PCIe with 16 CPU lanes, and integrated UHD 610 graphics make it a more complete package for a basic desktop build. A 3.50 GHz base clock with no boost requirement means predictable performance, and the active production status means it remains available for new systems. The 2 MB shared L3 cache is small, but the newer architecture compensates in the recorded scores.

For a user choosing between these two, the Opteron 3350 HE is the pick when the workload is multi-core rendering and the platform already exists or can be sourced. The Celeron G5920 is the pick when building a new desktop that needs integrated graphics, modern memory, and a current socket. The benchmark gap is tiny, but the platform differences are not.