AMD Opteron 4226 vs Intel Core i5-4300M Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 4226 wins every head-to-head test against the Intel Core i5-4300M. Across five Cinebench workloads, the Opteron leads by a consistent margin of roughly 13% in both single-core and multi-core tests. The Intel part wins zero comparisons.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in Cinebench-style workloads, the Opteron 4226 is the clear choice. Its six cores and higher base clock (2.70 GHz versus 2.60 GHz) translate into measurable advantages. The Opteron also offers ECC memory support and a dual-channel memory bus with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth, making it suitable for server environments where data integrity matters.

The Intel Core i5-4300M, however, is a mobile processor with a 37 W TDP, versus the Opteron's 95 W. It includes integrated Intel HD 5000 graphics, which the Opteron lacks entirely. For users who need a self-contained mobile solution with on-die graphics, the i5-4300M is the only option that provides display output without a discrete GPU.

The Opteron's launch MSRP is $125, a figure recorded in the database.

Neither processor exceeds the 27th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Both sit at the same percentile rank, indicating they occupy similar performance tiers despite their architectural differences. The average benchmark scores are close: 1004 for the Intel and 995 for the AMD, a difference of less than 1%.

The verdict: choose the Opteron 4226 for multi-threaded compute tasks, ECC memory, and server workloads. Choose the Core i5-4300M for mobile deployments, lower power draw, and integrated graphics capability.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Opteron 4226 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2890 versus 2515 for the Intel Core i5-4300M, a 13% advantage. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 291 versus 253.

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The AMD Opteron 4226 also wins the single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 171 versus 149 for the Intel part (12.9% higher). In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 408 versus 355 (13% higher).

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes for the AMD Opteron 4226, no for the Intel Core i5-4300M. The Opteron explicitly lists ECC memory as supported, while the Intel part does not. This makes the Opteron more suitable for error-correcting server workloads.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-4300M. It features Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics. The AMD Opteron 4226 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-4300M has an average benchmark score of 1004, while the AMD Opteron 4226 scores 995. The nearest rival to the Intel part is the Intel Core i5-2500S with a 0% delta. The nearest rival to the Opteron is the Intel Core i7-2635QM with a 0% delta.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Opteron 4226 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core i5-4300M has 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel part's hyper-threading allows 4 concurrent threads, but the Opteron's higher core count still wins in all Cinebench tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a sweep for the AMD Opteron 4226, with all five Cinebench tests going its way. The margins are remarkably consistent, hovering around 13% across every workload.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 291 against the Intel's 253, a delta of 13.1%. This test is the oldest in the set, yet the performance gap matches the newer workloads.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the Opteron at 1213 versus 1056, a 12.9% lead. The single-core variant of R20 shows 171 versus 149, also 12.9%. This consistency suggests the Opteron's advantage is structural rather than workload-specific.

Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the pattern: 2890 for the Opteron, 2515 for the Intel, a 13% delta. The R23 single-core test shows 408 versus 355, again 13%.

Notably, the Intel Core i5-4300M has additional Geekbench scores in the database that the Opteron lacks: 1817 multi-core and 882 single-core. These cannot be compared directly, but they contribute to the Intel's average benchmark score of 1004.

The Opteron's wins are not marginal. A 13% consistent lead across five different rendering workloads indicates a genuine performance tier difference. The Intel part's 2 cores with 4 threads cannot match the Opteron's 6 physical cores in these compute-heavy tasks, even though the Intel part has a higher boost clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.10 GHz).

The nearest rivals in the database for each part highlight their respective peer groups. The Intel Core i5-4300M sits alongside the Intel Core i5-2500S (0% delta), Intel Core i7-5600U (-0.1%), Intel Core i7-2630QM (-0.1%), and AMD FX-9830P (-0.2%). The AMD Opteron 4226 matches the Intel Core i7-2635QM (0%), Intel Core i7-2920XM (0%), Intel Core i3-8130U (0.1%), and Intel Xeon W3565 (0.2%). These rival sets confirm that both CPUs occupy similar overall performance territory, despite the Opteron's head-to-head sweep.

Specification Differences

The most striking difference is core count: the AMD Opteron 4226 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4300M has 2 cores and 4 threads. This 3x core advantage for the Opteron explains its consistent wins in multi-threaded tests.

Clock speeds differ. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Opteron has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The Intel part boosts higher, but the Opteron starts from a higher base.

Thermal design power differs substantially: 37 W for the Intel mobile part versus 95 W for the AMD server part. This nearly 3x difference in TDP reflects their different market segments.

Sockets are incompatible. The Intel uses Socket G3, while the AMD uses Socket C32.

Memory support differs: both support DDR3, but the Opteron explicitly lists a dual-channel memory bus with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part does not list a memory bus or bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported only on the Opteron.

Integrated graphics exist only on the Intel part (Intel HD 5000). The Opteron has none.

PCIe generation: the Opteron lists PCIe Gen 2 support. The Intel part does not list PCIe information.

Release dates differ by nearly two years: the Opteron launched November 13, 2011, while the Intel launched August 31, 2013.

The market segments frame the comparison: the Intel part is Mobile, the AMD part is Server/Workstation.

The production status of the Opteron is recorded as End-of-life, while the Intel part has no production status listed.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-4300M uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process by Intel's foundry. It packs 1,400 million transistors into a 118 mm² die. The cache layout is per-core: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, plus a shared 3 MB L3 cache.

The AMD Opteron 4226 uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Valencia, built on a 32 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It contains 1,200 million transistors on a much larger 315 mm² die. The cache is organized differently: 288 KB L1 total, 6 MB L2 total, and 8 MB shared L3. This gives the Opteron more total cache at every level except L1, where Intel's per-core structure provides 128 KB total across two cores.

The Bulldozer design uses a module-based approach with shared resources, while Haswell uses traditional per-core designs with hyper-threading. The Opteron's 6 cores are physical, not logical, which helps in throughput-heavy server workloads.

The Intel part is a dual-core with hyper-threading, yielding 4 threads. The Opteron is a hexa-core without SMT, yielding 6 threads. This explains why the Opteron wins multi-core tests despite lower boost clocks.

The process node advantage goes to Intel: 22 nm versus 32 nm. However, this did not translate into a performance win in the recorded benchmarks. The Opteron's larger die (315 mm² versus 118 mm²) and older process consumed more power (95 W versus 37 W) but delivered higher Cinebench scores.

The integrated graphics on the Intel part (Intel HD 5000) add functionality that the Opteron cannot match, but this feature does not appear in the benchmark results. The Opteron's PCIe Gen 2 support and ECC memory indicate its server orientation.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 4226 wins every benchmark recorded in the head-to-head comparison. All five Cinebench tests, spanning R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core variants, go to the Opteron. The margins range from 12.9% to 13.1%, making this a decisive and consistent victory.

The Opteron's wins are particularly pronounced in multi-core workloads. Its 6 physical cores and 6 MB L2 cache allow it to sustain throughput in rendering tasks. The 8 MB shared L3 cache provides ample working set for complex scenes. The 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, while modest by modern standards, is sufficient for the six-core design.

The Intel Core i5-4300M wins in categories not measured by Cinebench. Its integrated Intel HD 5000 graphics provide display output without a discrete GPU, a critical advantage for mobile systems. Its 37 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops and compact designs where power draw is constrained. The 22 nm process and smaller die (118 mm²) indicate better power efficiency per unit area.

The Intel part also has a higher boost clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.10 GHz), which may benefit bursty single-threaded workloads not captured in the Cinebench suite. However, the recorded data shows the Opteron winning even the single-core Cinebench tests, so this boost advantage did not materialize in practice.

For server deployments requiring ECC memory, the Opteron is the only choice. Its Socket C32 platform and server-class features (PCIe Gen 2, dual-channel memory with specified bandwidth) align with workstation use cases. The end-of-life production status, however, means it is not a current purchasing recommendation.

For mobile deployments, the Intel part is the only viable option. Its mobile market segment, integrated graphics, and lower TDP make it a functional laptop processor. The Opteron, with its 95 W TDP and no integrated graphics, cannot serve in that role.

The database records 0 wins for the Intel part and 5 wins for the AMD part in head-to-head benchmarks. The verdict is clear: the Opteron 4226 is the superior processor for the tested workloads, while the Core i5-4300M retains value only in its mobile-specific features. Users should select based on their platform requirements, not on Cinebench performance, since the Opteron dominates that metric entirely.