AMD Opteron 4386 vs AMD PRO A8-9600 Comparison
AMD Opteron 4386
PRO A8-9600
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Opteron 4386 vs AMD PRO A8-9600
Where Each One Wins
The benchmark data presents a clear but narrow picture: the AMD PRO A8-9600 wins every single recorded head-to-head test against the AMD Opteron 4386. Across all five Cinebench workloads, the desktop part takes the victory, though the margins are consistently slim. The PRO A8-9600 leads by 1.4% in Cinebench R15 multicore, 1.4% in R20 multicore, 1.8% in R20 singlecore, 1.4% in R23 multicore, and 1.5% in R23 singlecore. The Opteron 4386 records zero wins in the direct comparisons.
Looking at the broader database averages, the PRO A8-9600 holds an average benchmark score of 971, which places it 0.3% above the Intel Core i5-2400S and 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U, while sitting 0.4% below both the AMD A10-7870K and the Intel Core i3-4130. The Opteron 4386 averages 957, matching the Intel Core i7-950 exactly, sitting 0.1% above the AMD Athlon X4 870K and Intel Xeon W3550, and 0.1% below the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600. Both processors land at the 26th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance distribution.
The use-case split, therefore, does not emerge from benchmark wins, since the PRO A8-9600 claims all five. Instead, the split comes from what each processor offers beyond raw Cinebench scores. The PRO A8-9600 is a desktop part with integrated Radeon R7 graphics, DDR4 memory support, and a 65 watt TDP, making it suitable for compact desktop builds where the GPU is already included. The Opteron 4386 targets the server and workstation segment with 8 physical cores and 8 threads, a larger L2 cache, and shared L3 cache, which suggests workloads that benefit from more parallel resources even if the recorded Cinebench results do not reflect a decisive advantage.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different AMD families separated by roughly four years of development. The PRO A8-9600 uses the Excavator architecture on the Bristol Ridge codename, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It integrates 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die. The Opteron 4386 uses the older Piledriver architecture on the Seoul codename, fabricated on a 32 nm process with 1,200 million transistors spread across a 315 mm² die. The transistor and die size figures reveal an interesting inversion: the newer desktop chip packs more than double the transistors into a smaller physical area, reflecting the density improvements of the newer process node.
The core counts differ significantly. The PRO A8-9600 offers 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Opteron 4386 provides 8 cores and 8 threads. Despite having half the cores, the PRO A8-9600 still edges ahead in multi-threaded Cinebench tests, which suggests that the Excavator cores deliver noticeably better per-core throughput than the older Piledriver cores. The cache hierarchy also diverges: the PRO A8-9600 has 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache with no L3, while the Opteron 4386 has 384 KB of L1, 8 MB of L2, and an additional 8 MB of shared L3. The Opteron's larger cache pool does not translate into a benchmark advantage in the recorded tests.
Memory support marks another fundamental difference. The PRO A8-9600 uses DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC support. The Opteron 4386 uses DDR3 memory, with the database recording no memory bus width or bandwidth figure, and no ECC support either. The PRO A8-9600 also brings PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, whereas the Opteron's PCIe information is not recorded. The PRO A8-9600 includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics; the Opteron has no integrated graphics, which is typical for a server processor that relies on a discrete GPU or no display output at all.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The closest contest appears in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the PRO A8-9600 scores 284 against the Opteron's 280, a 1.4% margin. This result is particularly striking given the Opteron's 8 cores versus the PRO's 4 cores. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore: 1184 for the PRO A8-9600 against 1168 for the Opteron, again a 1.4% gap. The single-core tests show slightly larger relative differences. In Cinebench R20 singlecore, the PRO scores 167 versus 164, a 1.8% lead, the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set. Cinebench R23 singlecore follows with 398 versus 392, a 1.5% advantage.
Cinebench R23 multicore records 2820 for the PRO A8-9600 and 2782 for the Opteron, maintaining the consistent 1.4% delta seen in the other multicore tests. The data shows remarkable consistency: every multicore test lands at exactly 1.4%, and the single-core tests cluster between 1.5% and 1.8%. This uniformity suggests a fixed per-core performance advantage for the Excavator architecture rather than workload-specific scaling effects. The Opteron's 8 cores cannot overcome the PRO A8-9600's per-core efficiency, even in tests that should favor additional cores.
The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The PRO A8-9600 averages 971, which is 14 points higher than the Opteron's 957. That difference appears small in absolute terms, but it represents the aggregate across all recorded workloads. The nearest rival comparisons show both chips interacting with similar company: the PRO A8-9600 trades blows with the Core i5-2400S, Ryzen 7 3700U, A10-7870K, and Core i3-4130, all within 0.4% of each other. The Opteron 4386 sits in a peer group with the Core i7-950, Athlon X4 870K, Ryzen Embedded R1600, and Xeon W3550, all within 0.1% of each other.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The AMD Opteron 4386 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD PRO A8-9600 has 4 cores and 4 threads.
Q: Does the Opteron 4386 ever beat the PRO A8-9600 in any benchmark?
A: No. The head-to-head data records zero wins for the Opteron 4386 across all five Cinebench tests. The PRO A8-9600 wins all five.
Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?
A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R20 singlecore, where the PRO A8-9600 leads by 1.8% with a score of 167 versus 164.
Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?
A: No. The database records ECC memory support as false for both the PRO A8-9600 and the Opteron 4386.
Q: What memory types do they support?
A: The PRO A8-9600 supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron 4386 supports DDR3 memory, with no bus width or bandwidth recorded.
Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?
A: The PRO A8-9600 has an average benchmark score of 971, while the Opteron 4386 averages 957. Both sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The PRO A8-9600 uses the Excavator architecture on the Bristol Ridge codename, while the Opteron 4386 uses Piledriver on the Seoul codename. The process nodes differ: 28 nm for the PRO A8-9600 versus 32 nm for the Opteron. Transistor counts show 3,100 million for the PRO A8-9600 and 1,200 million for the Opteron, while die sizes are 250 mm² and 315 mm² respectively. The PRO A8-9600 has 4 cores and 4 threads; the Opteron has 8 cores and 8 threads.
Base clocks are identical at 3.10 GHz for both, but boost clocks differ: 3.40 GHz for the PRO A8-9600 versus 3.80 GHz for the Opteron. TDP ratings are 65 watts for the PRO A8-9600 and 95 watts for the Opteron. Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket AM4 for the PRO A8-9600, AMD Socket C32 for the Opteron. Cache configurations differ with 320 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 for the PRO A8-9600, versus 384 KB L1, 8 MB L2, and 8 MB shared L3 for the Opteron.
Memory support diverges: DDR4 for the PRO A8-9600 with dual-channel and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, DDR3 for the Opteron with no recorded bus details. The PRO A8-9600 includes PCIe Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes and integrated Radeon R7 graphics; the Opteron records no PCIe information and no integrated graphics. Market segments differ, with the PRO A8-9600 listed as Desktop and the Opteron as Server/Workstation. Release dates are 2016-10-02 for the PRO A8-9600 and 2012-12-03 for the Opteron. The PRO A8-9600 has a production status of Active; the Opteron's status is not recorded.
The Verdict
The benchmark data leads to a straightforward conclusion for raw Cinebench performance: the AMD PRO A8-9600 wins every recorded test against the AMD Opteron 4386. The margins are small, between 1.4% and 1.8%, but they are consistent across both single-core and multi-core workloads. Anyone choosing based purely on these recorded scores should select the PRO A8-9600.
However, the specification differences suggest distinct intended use cases that the benchmarks do not fully capture. The Opteron 4386 offers 8 cores and 8 threads, double the core count of the PRO A8-9600, along with 8 MB of L2 cache and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. These resources could prove valuable in server or workstation environments where workloads scale across many threads, even if the specific Cinebench versions recorded here do not show that benefit. The Opteron also boosts to 3.80 GHz, higher than the PRO A8-9600's 3.40 GHz.
The PRO A8-9600 counters with a smaller 65 watt TDP, integrated Radeon R7 graphics, DDR4 memory support, and a more modern 28 nm process. For desktop builders who need a complete package without a separate graphics card, the PRO A8-9600 eliminates that requirement entirely. Its lower TDP also suggests easier cooling and lower power draw in a desktop chassis.
The data shows both processors sitting at the 26th percentile, meaning neither offers outstanding performance relative to the broader CPU landscape. Their average scores, 971 and 957, place them within 1.5% of each other. The PRO A8-9600's nearest rivals include the Core i5-2400S and Ryzen 7 3700U, while the Opteron 4386 matches the Core i7-950. These peer groups indicate that the PRO A8-9600 competes with mid-range desktop parts from its era, while the Opteron 4386 aligns with older high-end desktop and workstation chips.
The verdict depends on context. For a desktop system where integrated graphics, DDR4 memory, and lower power consumption matter, the PRO A8-9600 is the clear choice, and it wins all recorded benchmarks. For a server or workstation deployment where 8 physical cores, larger caches, and the Opteron 4000 series ecosystem are relevant, the Opteron 4386 offers structural advantages that the Cinebench scores do not reflect. The recorded data favors the PRO A8-9600 in every direct comparison, but the Opteron's specification sheet points toward a different class of workload.