CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Opteron 4280 sweeps this comparison outright, winning all five head-to-head Cinebench tests with a remarkably consistent margin. The narrowest gap comes in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Opteron 4280 scores 385 against the Xeon E5-2603 v3's 323, a 19.2% advantage. That margin widens only slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with the AMD part posting 1607 versus 1346, a 19.4% lead. The pattern holds across every workload category, making the overall result unambiguous: the Opteron 4280 is the faster processor in this pairing.

Single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Opteron 4280 delivers 226 points against the Xeon's 189, a 19.6% edge, the largest single delta in the entire dataset. Cinebench R23 single-core follows at 540 versus 452, a 19.5% advantage. These are not marginal wins; they are consistent, near-uniform deltas hovering around 19-20% across five separate benchmark runs. The data does not show a single test where the Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 pulls ahead, nor even one where it closes the gap to single digits.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head result, though they compress the difference. The Opteron 4280 carries an average benchmark score of 1107, while the Xeon E5-2603 v3 sits at 1103. That is a razor-thin 0.4% gap in the aggregate, yet the Cinebench suite specifically shows a much larger separation. The explanation lies in the rivals each part attracts: the Opteron 4280's nearest rival is the AMD PRO A12-8870 at an identical 1107 (0% delta), while the Xeon's closest competitor is the Intel Pentium Gold G6605 at 1103 (0% delta). Both processors land in the 31st percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same overall performance tier despite the Opteron's clear Cinebench superiority.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 4280 wins everywhere the benchmark suite measures. It takes multi-core workloads by margins of 19.2% to 19.4%, and single-core workloads by 19.5% to 19.6%. For rendering, simulation, or any threaded task that scales across cores, the Opteron 4280's eight cores versus the Xeon's six provide the structural advantage that the Cinebench scores confirm. The multi-core deltas are consistent at 19.2% (R15), 19.4% (R20), and 19.4% (R23), suggesting the advantage is stable regardless of the rendering engine's specific demands.

The Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 has no benchmark wins to claim, the winsA count is 5 and winsB is 0. However, the data does indicate areas where the Xeon is not worse, just untested. The Xeon has no Cinebench R15 single-core score in the dataset, so that specific comparison is unavailable. In the four tests where both processors have scores, the Opteron 4280 wins all of them. The Xeon's strongest relative showing is in the average benchmark score, where it trails by only 0.4%, and its nearest-rival list includes the AMD PRO A12-9800 at 1104 (a -0.1% delta, meaning the Xeon is 0.1% slower) and the AMD Opteron 3280 at 1106 (-0.3% delta). Those are aggregate figures, not workload-specific wins.

For use-case planning, the data suggests the Opteron 4280 is the pick for Cinebench-style rendering workloads. The Xeon E5-2603 v3's case rests on other strengths not captured in these benchmarks, its memory architecture, PCIe capabilities, and platform features, which the next sections address.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The AMD Opteron 4280 uses the Bulldozer architecture (codename Valencia) built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. The Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 uses the Haswell architecture (codename Haswell-EP) on Intel's 22 nm process, packing 2,600 million transistors into a 356 mm² die. The Xeon packs more than twice the transistor count into a modestly larger die, reflecting the denser manufacturing node.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The Opteron 4280 offers 8 cores and 8 threads, all running at a 2.80 GHz base clock with a 3.50 GHz boost clock. The Xeon E5-2603 v3 provides 6 cores and 6 threads at a 1600.00 MHz base clock (1.60 GHz) with no boost clock listed in the data. The Opteron's raw clock advantage, 2.80 GHz base versus 1.60 GHz base, is enormous, and its boost capability extends the gap further. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, so threads equal cores on both parts.

Cache hierarchies reflect different design philosophies. The Opteron 4280 has 384 KB of L1 cache, 8 MB of L2, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Xeon E5-2603 v3 lists 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 15 MB of shared L3. Scaling the Xeon's per-core L1 and L2 figures to six cores yields roughly 384 KB L1 and 1.5 MB L2 total, meaning the Opteron holds a significant L2 advantage while the Xeon's shared L3 is nearly double the Opteron's 8 MB.

Memory and platform support diverge sharply. The Opteron 4280 uses dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Xeon E5-2603 v3 uses quad-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s, exactly double the bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, which suits their server/workstation positioning. The PCIe generations differ as well: the Opteron runs PCIe Gen 2, while the Xeon offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon's platform is newer and more capable in memory bandwidth and I/O throughput, but that does not translate into benchmark wins in this dataset.

Both parts are end-of-life, unlocked multipliers are not available on either, and neither includes integrated graphics. The Opteron 4280 launched on 2011-11-13 with a launch MSRP of $255; the Xeon E5-2603 v3 launched on 2014-09-07 with a launch MSRP of $213.

The Verdict

The AMD Opteron 4280 is the clear winner for Cinebench workloads. Every single head-to-head benchmark, all five of them, goes to the AMD part with margins between 19.2% and 19.6%. No test in the dataset favors the Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3. If the decision hinges on rendering performance as measured by Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, the Opteron 4280 is the correct choice without qualification.

The Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3's case must be argued from outside the benchmark data. It offers quad-channel DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s versus dual-channel DDR3 at 25.6 GB/s, PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes versus PCIe Gen 2, and a more modern 22 nm Haswell architecture. Those platform advantages matter for memory-bound or I/O-intensive server workloads, but the Cinebench scores do not capture them. The Xeon's 15 MB of shared L3 cache is also nearly double the Opteron's 8 MB, which could benefit certain cache-sensitive workloads, but again, the benchmark data does not show this.

The aggregate metrics tell a nuanced story. Both processors sit at the 31st percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by just 4 points (1107 versus 1103). The Opteron 4280's nearest rivals include the AMD PRO A12-8870 (identical 1107) and AMD Opteron 3280 (1106, 0.1% slower), while the Xeon E5-2603 v3's nearest rivals include the Intel Pentium Gold G6605 (identical 1103) and AMD PRO A12-9800 (1104, 0.1% faster). These are different performance neighborhoods with similar aggregate results.

For rendering and compute workloads that resemble Cinebench, choose the AMD Opteron 4280. For platforms requiring the Xeon's memory bandwidth, PCIe gen 3 lanes, or newer architecture, the Intel part has structural advantages that the benchmarks do not measure. The data is decisive on one point: in every measured test, the Opteron 4280 is faster.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Opteron 4280 wins all 5 head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 wins 0.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: The Opteron 4280 leads by 19.2% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (385 vs 323), 19.4% in R20 multi-core (1607 vs 1346), and 19.4% in R23 multi-core (3828 vs 3207).

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: The Opteron 4280 leads by 19.6% in Cinebench R20 single-core (226 vs 189) and 19.5% in R23 single-core (540 vs 452). No R15 single-core score is available for the Xeon.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Opteron 4280 and the Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 support ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Opteron 4280 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither supports SMT.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Opteron 4280 averages 1107, and the Xeon E5-2603 v3 averages 1103, a difference of 0.4%. Both sit at the 31st percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Opteron 4280 | Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 1600.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | None |

| TDP | 95 W | 85 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket C32 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Bulldozer | Haswell |

| Codename | Valencia | Haswell-EP |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 1,200 million | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | 315 mm² | 356 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 8 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 15 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Launch MSRP | $255 | $213 |

| Release Date | 2011-11-13 | 2014-09-07 |

| Part Number | OS4280WLU8KGU | SR20A |

| Average Benchmark Score | 1107 | 1103 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 31 | 31 |