AMD Opteron 3350 HE vs Intel Core i7-870S Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-870S wins every recorded benchmark in this comparison, taking all 5 head-to-head tests. The margins are small but consistent, ranging from 2.2% to 3.0% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Intel part holds a 2.5% advantage in Cinebench R20 multi-core and a 2.5% edge in R23 single-core, which suggests a uniform performance lead rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The AMD Opteron 3350 HE is not without its own merits, however. The most striking distinction in the database is power consumption: the AMD chip carries a TDP of 45 watts compared to the Intel's 82 watts. That is a dramatic difference, and for anyone building a low-power server or a compact workstation where thermal envelope is the primary constraint, the Opteron becomes the rational choice despite losing every benchmark. The Intel part wins on raw throughput in every test, but the AMD part wins on efficiency per watt by a wide margin implied by the TDP figures.

The benchmark averages tell a similar story. The Intel Core i7-870S posts an average benchmark score of 809, landing in the 22nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE averages 789, at the 21st percentile. The Intel is roughly 2.5% faster on average, and its nearest rival is the AMD A10-6800K at an identical 809 average score. The Opteron's nearest rival is the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 at 789, with a negligible delta of -0.1%. Neither chip is a performance leader in the modern landscape; both sit in the lower quartile of all recorded CPUs.

In practical terms: pick the Intel if you want the fastest Cinebench scores in this pairing and can tolerate the higher power draw. Pick the AMD if you are building a power-sensitive system and can sacrifice roughly 2 to 3 percent performance in exchange for a 45-watt TDP. The Opteron also offers integrated graphics on certain motherboards as a chipset feature, which could simplify a basic server build, though the Intel part has no integrated graphics listed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-870S is built on the Nehalem architecture with the Lynnfield codename, fabricated on a 45 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It packs 774 million transistors into a 296 mm² die. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE uses the K10 architecture with the Delhi codename, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. The AMD has nearly 55% more transistors and a slightly larger die, but it still loses every benchmark.

The cache layouts are notably different. The Intel chip allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip lists 192 KB of L1 total and 4 MB of L2 total, also with 8 MB of shared L3. The Intel design gives each core private L2 segments, while the AMD appears to pool its L2. Both share 8 MB of L3, which is a rare point of parity between these two very different designs.

Threading is a major architectural split. The Intel Core i7-870S has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning it supports simultaneous multithreading. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no SMT capability. This explains why the Intel part wins multi-core tests even though the AMD has higher base and boost clocks: 2.80 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost for AMD versus 2.67 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost for Intel. The Intel chip does more work per clock and has two extra logical threads to deploy.

The socket situation is entirely different as well. The Intel part uses Socket 1156, while the AMD uses Socket AM3+. The AMD is classified as a server/workstation part in the Opteron 3000 series, while the Intel is a desktop part. Both support DDR3 memory over a dual-channel bus, and the AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory according to the database. The Intel has PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes from the CPU; the AMD lists PCIe Gen 2 without a lane count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test opens the comparison with the Intel at 236 and the AMD at 231, a 2.2% delta in favor of Intel. That is a narrow win, but it sets the pattern for the rest of the suite. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Intel scores 987 against 963 for the AMD, a 2.5% margin. The single-core R20 test shows Intel at 139 and AMD at 135, a 3% delta, the largest gap in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R23 multi-core gives the Intel 2350 versus the AMD 2294, a 2.4% difference. The R23 single-core test closes the suite with Intel at 331 and AMD at 323, another 2.5% margin. The pattern is remarkably consistent: the Intel advantage hovers between 2.2% and 3.0% across every test, regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This consistency indicates a per-clock efficiency advantage rather than a threading advantage alone, since the single-core tests also favor Intel despite the AMD's higher boost clock of 3.80 GHz versus 3.60 GHz.

The data suggests that the Intel Nehalem core simply executes instructions more efficiently than the AMD K10 core at similar clock speeds. The AMD's higher clocks do not compensate for its architectural deficit. The multi-core tests show a slightly smaller margin (2.2% to 2.5%) than the single-core tests (3% in R20), which is interesting: the Intel's extra threads help in multi-core, but the per-thread advantage is even larger in single-core workloads.

In the broader context, the Intel's average benchmark score of 809 puts it exactly level with the AMD A10-6800K at 809, and slightly ahead of the AMD Athlon X4 850 at 806 and the Intel Xeon X5482 at 805. It trails the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 at 813 by 0.5%. The AMD Opteron's average of 789 sits just below the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 at 789 (delta of -0.1%), the QX9770 at 790 (-0.1%), and just above the Intel Core i5-4210U and i5-3610ME, both at 788.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in this comparison?

A: The Intel Core i7-870S wins all 5 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins 0. The Intel's margins range from 2.2% to 3.0% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: How does the power consumption compare between the two?

A: The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Core i7-870S has a TDP of 82 watts. The AMD part draws far less power per the recorded specifications, making it the efficiency-focused option despite losing every performance test.

Q: Do both processors support the same number of threads?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-870S has 4 cores and 8 threads due to simultaneous multithreading. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no threading technology listed.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-870S has a base clock of 2.67 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The AMD clocks are higher in both cases, yet the Intel still wins every benchmark.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-870S has an average benchmark score of 809, placing it at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE has an average of 789, at the 21st percentile.

Q: What is the memory configuration for each?

A: Both support DDR3 memory over a dual-channel bus. The AMD Opteron 3350 HE lists a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s; the Intel Core i7-870S does not have a bandwidth figure recorded. Neither supports ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-870S wins everywhere that raw Cinebench performance matters. It leads in all five recorded tests: R15 multi-core (236 versus 231), R20 multi-core (987 versus 963), R20 single-core (139 versus 135), R23 multi-core (2350 versus 2294), and R23 single-core (331 versus 323). The margin is consistent, never dropping below 2.2% and peaking at 3% in the R20 single-core test. For anyone running rendering workloads, content creation tasks, or any software that scales with CPU throughput, the Intel part is the faster choice in this pairing. Its 8 threads give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded applications, and its higher per-clock efficiency shows up even in single-threaded tests despite the AMD's higher boost clock.

The AMD Opteron 3350 HE wins the efficiency argument by a massive margin. Its TDP of 45 watts is nearly half the Intel's 82 watts. For a server or workstation running 24/7, where every watt translates into heat and electricity consumption, that difference is substantial. The Opteron also has a higher base clock (2.80 GHz versus 2.67 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.60 GHz), so it is not a slow chip; it just loses by a small margin in the benchmarks. The AMD part is classified as a Server/Workstation product and offers integrated graphics on certain motherboards as a chipset feature, which could reduce the need for a discrete GPU in basic server configurations.

The Intel part is the desktop performer; the AMD part is the low-power server option. Neither is a modern powerhouse, with both sitting in the low 20s percentile of all CPUs. But the choice is clear: performance seekers take the Intel, power-conscious builders take the AMD, and the performance penalty for choosing the AMD is only about 2.5% on average.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i7-870S | AMD Opteron 3350 HE |

|---|---|---|

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.67 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 82 watts | 45 watts |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | AMD Socket AM3+ |

| Architecture | Nehalem | K10 |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Delhi |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 774 million | 1,200 million |

| Die Size | 296 mm² | 315 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 4 MB |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 29.9 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2010-07-18 | 2012-12-03 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $125 |

| Part Number | SLBQ7 | OS3350HOW4KHK |

| Average Benchmark Score | 809 | 789 |

| Percentile | 22nd | 21st |

The specification table reveals a generational gap: the Intel part released in July 2010, while the AMD part arrived in December 2012. The AMD uses a more advanced 32 nm process versus Intel's 45 nm, and packs more transistors into a slightly larger die. Yet the Intel part still wins every benchmark, demonstrating that architecture efficiency can overcome process node advantages and clock speed deficits. The AMD's 45-watt TDP is the single most compelling differentiator, making it the clear choice for power-constrained environments, while the Intel's 8-thread capability and higher benchmark scores make it the performance pick.