AMD Opteron 4280 vs Intel Core i3-4150 Comparison

Intel Core i3-4150 and AMD Opteron 4280 represent two very different approaches to computing, and the benchmark data shows a clear split between them. The Intel part is a dual-core desktop chip from the Haswell era, while the AMD is an eight-core server processor built on the older Bulldozer architecture. The recorded results show the AMD Opteron 4280 winning every single head-to-head benchmark, yet the two CPUs sit at nearly the same overall performance percentile, which reveals a lot about their distinct strengths and weaknesses.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 4280 wins in every recorded benchmark category, but the nature of those wins matters more than the simple fact of victory. The largest advantage appears in multi-core workloads, where the Opteron’s eight physical cores allow it to pull ahead substantially. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 385 against the Core i3-4150’s 290, a gap of 24.7 percent. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Opteron’s 1607 beats the Intel’s 1212, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Opteron’s 3828 outpaces the Intel’s 2888. These results indicate the Opteron is the stronger choice for heavily threaded rendering and compute tasks.

The Intel Core i3-4150 does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but it holds its own in a different way. Its single-core scores, while lower than the Opteron’s, come from a chip with only two physical cores and four threads, meaning the per-core efficiency is far higher. The Opteron’s single-core wins, 226 versus 170 in Cinebench R20 and 540 versus 407 in Cinebench R23, are achieved with a 3.50 GHz boost clock on eight cores, but the Intel part produces those lower scores with a 54 W TDP compared to the Opteron’s 95 W. The data shows the Intel chip delivers competitive single-threaded performance per watt, even though it loses the raw score comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different architectural lineages. The Intel Core i3-4150 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process with 1,400 million transistors packed into a 177 mm² die. The AMD Opteron 4280 uses the Bulldozer architecture on a 32 nm process with 1,200 million transistors spread across a much larger 315 mm² die. These process and die size differences explain part of the efficiency gap between the two chips.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Intel part has 2 cores and 4 threads, relying on Hyper-Threading to double its logical processing units. The AMD Opteron has 8 physical cores and 8 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading. Cache layouts also differ fundamentally. The Core i3-4150 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 3 MB of shared L3. The Opteron 4280 has 384 KB of L1 total, 8 MB of L2, and 8 MB of shared L3, giving it far more aggregate cache but less per-core L1.

Memory support shows a rare point of commonality. Both chips support DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Opteron adds ECC memory support, which the Intel part lacks, a meaningful differentiator for server reliability. The Intel chip includes integrated Intel HD 4400 graphics, while the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all. PCIe generations differ as well, with the Intel part using Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU and the Opteron using Gen 2. The Intel chip is a desktop part, while the Opteron targets the server and workstation segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD Opteron 4280 wins all multi-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3828 versus the Intel Core i3-4150’s 2888, a 24.6 percent advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4150 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel HD 4400 graphics. The AMD Opteron 4280 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for any display output.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Opteron 4280 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i3-4150 does not offer ECC support.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Intel Core i3-4150 has an average benchmark score of 1119, while the AMD Opteron 4280 averages 1107. The Intel chip sits at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs, and the Opteron sits at the 31st percentile.

Q: What are their launch MSRPs?

A: The Intel Core i3-4150 had a launch MSRP of $117, and the AMD Opteron 4280 had a launch MSRP of $255.

Q: What sockets do these processors use?

A: The Intel Core i3-4150 uses Intel Socket 1150, while the AMD Opteron 4280 uses AMD Socket C32.

Specification Differences

The specifications table shows where these two chips diverge. The Intel Core i3-4150 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD Opteron 4280 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ, with the Intel running at 3.50 GHz and the AMD at 2.80 GHz, but the Opteron boosts to 3.50 GHz while the Intel part has no boost clock. TDPs are 54 W for the Intel and 95 W for the AMD.

Process nodes separate the pair clearly: the Intel chip uses 22 nm, the AMD uses 32 nm. Transistor counts are 1,400 million for Intel and 1,200 million for AMD, with die sizes of 177 mm² and 315 mm² respectively. Cache configurations are entirely different, with the Intel featuring per-core L1 and L2 plus 3 MB shared L3, while the AMD has larger aggregate L2 and L3 at 8 MB each. The Intel part includes integrated graphics, the AMD does not. PCIe support is Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the Intel versus Gen 2 on the AMD. ECC memory is supported only on the Opteron. Both use DDR3 with dual-channel memory buses and identical 25.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a consistent pattern of AMD dominance across every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 385 against the Intel’s 290, a 24.7 percent lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows the same trend with the Opteron at 1607 and the Intel at 1212, a 24.6 percent gap. The single-core tests tell a similar story, with the Opteron winning Cinebench R20 single-core 226 to 170 and Cinebench R23 single-core 540 to 407, both at 24.6 percent margins. Cinebench R23 multi-core finishes the sweep with the Opteron at 3828 and the Intel at 2888, another 24.6 percent advantage.

These margins are remarkably consistent, hovering near 24.6 to 24.8 percent across all five tests. That consistency suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific, driven by the Opteron’s eight physical cores and higher boost clock. The Intel part’s best result is its closest margin, but even there it loses by roughly a quarter. The average benchmark scores from the broader database confirm the near-parity in overall standing, with the Intel at 1119 and the AMD at 1107, separated by less than 1 percent despite the Opteron’s clean sweep in direct comparisons.

The Verdict

The AMD Opteron 4280 is the clear winner in raw benchmark performance, taking every recorded head-to-head test by margins of roughly 24.6 percent. Its eight physical cores and 8 MB of L3 cache make it the stronger choice for multi-threaded server workloads, and its ECC memory support adds reliability for data-sensitive environments. The Opteron’s launch MSRP of $255 reflects its server positioning, and its 95 W TDP is the cost of that extra compute density.

The Intel Core i3-4150, despite losing every benchmark, remains a different kind of product. Its 54 W TDP, integrated HD 4400 graphics, and smaller 177 mm² die make it a far more efficient desktop part. The database places it at the 32nd percentile overall, one point above the Opteron’s 31st, and its average score of 1119 edges out the Opteron’s 1107. For a desktop user who needs integrated graphics, lower power draw, and modern PCIe Gen 3 connectivity, the Intel chip delivers those features with a launch MSRP of $117. The data shows a straightforward split: the Opteron wins on throughput, the Core i3 wins on efficiency and platform features. The choice depends entirely on which of those priorities matters more.