AMD Opteron 4334 vs Intel Core i7-3635QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear, consistent picture: the Intel Core i7-3635QM wins every single head-to-head comparison in this dataset, with five wins against zero for the AMD Opteron 4334. The margin is remarkably uniform across all tests, which suggests a fundamental performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Starting with the oldest test in the set, Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 408 against the AMD's 338. That is a 20.7% delta in Intel's favor. The single-core result in Cinebench R20 shows a nearly identical gap: Intel scores 240, AMD scores 198, a 21.2% difference. The multi-core R20 run yields 1703 for Intel versus 1409 for AMD, a 20.9% edge.

The pattern holds in the newer Cinebench R23 workloads. In multi-core, the Intel Core i7-3635QM produces 4057 points while the AMD Opteron 4334 manages 3356, again a 20.9% delta. The single-core R23 test shows Intel at 572 and AMD at 473, which is the same 20.9% margin. Every benchmark in the head-to-head section lands within a narrow band of 20.7% to 21.2% — a striking consistency that indicates the performance gap scales evenly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks.

It is worth remembering the AMD Opteron 4334 has more physical cores — six versus four — yet still loses by roughly one-fifth in every test. This suggests that the Intel architecture extracts significantly more work per core, or that the AMD's Piledriver design suffers from inefficiencies that additional cores cannot compensate for in these specific workloads.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The Intel chip posts an average score of 1170 across its benchmark suite, while the AMD averages 1155. That is a modest 1.3% overall difference, but the head-to-head deltas of roughly 21% are far larger. The discrepancy arises because the two CPUs were tested on different benchmark sets — the Intel has Geekbench results included while the AMD does not — so the average scores are not directly comparable. The head-to-head tests, which use identical workloads, are the more reliable basis for comparison.

Both processors sit at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they are in the lower-middle tier of overall performance. The nearest rivals for the Intel include the Intel Core i7-2960XM and Core i5-3570S, both within 0.1% of its average score, and the AMD Opteron 6220 within 0.2%. The AMD Opteron 4334's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312 at -0.1% and the Intel Core i3-8145UE at +0.1%, with the Intel Core i5-4430 trailing by 0.5%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-3635QM wins all five head-to-head tests in the dataset. The AMD Opteron 4334 does not win any.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two CPUs?

A: The largest delta is 21.2%, seen in the Cinebench R20 single-core test, where Intel scores 240 versus AMD's 198. All other deltas are between 20.7% and 20.9%.

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 4334's higher core count help it in multi-threaded tests?

A: No. Despite having six cores versus the Intel's four, the AMD scores lower in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 4057 against AMD's 3356, a 20.9% deficit for the AMD.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in overall average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core i7-3635QM has an average benchmark score of 1170, while the AMD Opteron 4334 averages 1155. Both rank at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the AMD Opteron 4334 is competitive?

A: The data shows no such tests. The AMD trails in every head-to-head benchmark, with the smallest deficit being 20.7% in Cinebench R15 multi-core.

Q: What do the nearest rival comparisons reveal about each CPU's positioning?

A: The Intel's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-2960XM at +0.1%, while the AMD's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312 at -0.1%. Both CPUs sit in a tight cluster of similarly performing parts around the 1155-1170 average score range.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-3635QM is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, fabricated on a 22 nm process node by Intel's own foundry. The AMD Opteron 4334 uses the Piledriver architecture with the codename Seoul, built on a 32 nm process. The process node difference matters: the Intel part packs its transistors at a smaller geometry, which typically enables higher efficiency per watt.

The transistor counts and die sizes tell a more nuanced story. The Intel chip contains 1,480 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The AMD processor has 1,200 million transistors but on a much larger 315 mm² die. This means the Intel design achieves roughly twice the transistor density, a direct consequence of the more advanced 22 nm process versus AMD's 32 nm.

Cache organization differs substantially. The Intel Core i7-3635QM has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Opteron 4334 lists 288 KB of L1 total, 6 MB of L2 total, and 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD's larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB) may help in some workloads, but the benchmark results show it does not overcome the Intel's other advantages.

The Intel processor includes integrated graphics in the form of Intel HD 4000, while the AMD Opteron 4334 has no integrated graphics at all. This is consistent with their target markets — the Intel is a mobile part meant for laptops where a discrete GPU may not always be present, while the AMD is a server/workstation processor that would always be paired with a dedicated graphics solution or run headless.

Threading strategy is another key divergence. The Intel Core i7-3635QM supports simultaneous multithreading, offering 8 threads from its 4 physical cores. The AMD Opteron 4334 has 6 cores and 6 threads — no SMT support. In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel effectively presents 8 logical processors against AMD's 6, which partially explains its consistent 21% advantage despite having fewer physical cores.

Memory support also differs. The AMD Opteron 4334 explicitly lists DDR3 memory support, while the Intel's memory support field is null in the data. The Intel uses a dual-channel memory bus, while the AMD's memory bus configuration is not specified. Neither processor supports ECC memory according to the dataset.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ sharply. The Intel Core i7-3635QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Opteron 4334 has 6 cores and 6 threads. This is a fundamental architectural split: Intel uses fewer physical cores with SMT, AMD uses more physical cores without it.

Clock speeds favor the AMD on paper. The AMD Opteron 4334 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The Intel Core i7-3635QM runs at 2.40 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. The AMD's base clock is 0.70 GHz higher, and its boost is 0.10 GHz higher. Despite these clock advantages, the Intel wins all benchmarks, indicating that per-clock efficiency (IPC) is dramatically better on the Ivy Bridge architecture.

Power consumption heavily favors the Intel. The Intel Core i7-3635QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the AMD Opteron 4334 draws 95 watts. The AMD consumes more than twice the power budget yet delivers roughly 21% lower performance in every head-to-head test. This is a significant efficiency gap.

The sockets are incompatible. The Intel uses Intel BGA 1224, a mobile socket, while the AMD uses AMD Socket C32, a server platform. This alone determines their respective markets: the Intel is a mobile processor, the AMD is a server/workstation part.

Process technology differs as noted earlier: 22 nm for Intel versus 32 nm for AMD. Transistor counts are 1,480 million versus 1,200 million, and die sizes are 160 mm² versus 315 mm². The cache configurations differ in organization — per-core L1 and L2 for Intel versus aggregate figures for AMD — and the L3 totals are 6 MB for Intel versus 8 MB for AMD.

Integrated graphics are present only on the Intel part (Intel HD 4000). The AMD has none. The Intel's market segment is Mobile; the AMD's is Server/Workstation. The AMD's part number is OS4334WLU6KHK, while the Intel's part number is not specified. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates are close, with the Intel launching on August 31, 2012, and the AMD on December 3, 2012.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-3635QM is the faster processor in every benchmark where they are directly compared. It wins all five head-to-head tests with margins between 20.7% and 21.2%. The Intel achieves this with a 45-watt TDP, while the AMD consumes 95 watts. The Intel is also more transistor-dense, built on a more advanced 22 nm process, and includes integrated graphics.

The AMD Opteron 4334 counters with more physical cores (6 versus 4), higher clock speeds (3.10 GHz base versus 2.40 GHz), and a larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB). None of these advantages translate into benchmark wins. The data shows that the Intel's architectural efficiency — likely driven by its advanced process node and SMT support — overwhelms the AMD's raw specifications.

For a mobile user, the choice is obvious. The Intel Core i7-3635QM delivers superior performance at less than half the TDP, making it the only sensible option for battery-powered systems. The AMD Opteron 4334, with its 95-watt TDP and server socket, is not even a candidate for mobile use.

For a server or workstation environment, the picture is more complex. The AMD offers six physical cores, which may be advantageous in certain highly parallel server workloads not represented in this benchmark set. However, in the Cinebench tests that are available, the Intel's four cores with SMT outperform the AMD's six cores by a substantial margin. The absence of ECC support on both parts is worth noting, though the AMD's server heritage suggests it may be more suitable for always-on environments.

The percentile ranking places both at 33rd among all CPUs, indicating neither is a top-tier performer in the broader database. But within this specific comparison, the Intel Core i7-3635QM is the clear winner on every measurable axis.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3635QM wins in every scenario represented by the benchmark data. It is superior in single-core performance, as shown by the 21.2% advantage in Cinebench R20 single-core (240 versus 198) and the 20.9% edge in R23 single-core (572 versus 473). It is equally dominant in multi-core workloads, with a 20.9% lead in both R20 and R23 multi-core tests. Its efficiency is also a win: 45 watts versus 95 watts for comparable or better performance means the Intel is the better choice for thermally constrained systems.

The AMD Opteron 4334 has wins that are not reflected in benchmark scores but are visible in the specification sheet. It offers more physical cores (6 versus 4), which could be advantageous in workloads that scale with raw core count rather than per-core throughput — though the benchmark data does not include such a test. It has a higher base clock (3.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and a slightly higher boost clock (3.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz). Its larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB) may benefit certain cache-sensitive server workloads. The AMD also has a server-class socket (Socket C32), which positions it for multi-socket server platforms, though the data does not specify whether this CPU supports such configurations.

In practical terms, the Intel Core i7-3635QM is the pick for any workload measured in this dataset. The AMD Opteron 4334's potential advantages lie outside the tested benchmarks — in scenarios where six dedicated physical cores, higher clock speeds, or a larger shared cache might matter more than the architectural efficiency that the Cinebench suite rewards. The data cannot confirm those advantages, but the specifications suggest they may exist in untested server workloads. For everything the benchmarks measure, the Intel wins outright.