AMD Opteron 6212 vs Intel Core i5-3550 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-3550 wins all five recorded head-to-head comparisons against the AMD Opteron 6212. The Intel part leads by margins between 20.6% and 21.1% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Opteron 6212 does not post a single victory in the recorded database.

The i5-3550 is the clear choice for any workload where per-thread performance or overall responsiveness matters, including desktop applications, lightly threaded software, and everyday computing. The Opteron 6212, despite having twice the core count, falls behind in every measured test. Its only advantages appear in the specification sheet, such as support for ECC memory, quad-channel memory bandwidth, and a server-oriented platform, but these do not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data.

For users who need ECC memory support, quad-channel memory bandwidth, or a server/workstation platform, the Opteron 6212 remains a viable option. For everyone else, the i5-3550 delivers superior measured performance in every recorded benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-3550 uses the Ivy Bridge architecture, built on a 22 nm process by Intel. It features 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The chip contains 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die.

The AMD Opteron 6212 uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, built on a 32 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It features 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The chip contains 2,400 million transistors across a dual-die design measuring 2x 315 mm².

Cache structures differ substantially. The i5-3550 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Opteron 6212 has 768 KB of L1 cache total, 2 MB of L2 cache per module, and 8 MB of L3 cache per die.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The i5-3550 supports DDR3 memory through a dual-channel interface, delivering 25.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Opteron 6212 supports DDR3 through a quad-channel interface, delivering 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe support differs as well. The i5-3550 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Opteron 6212 provides PCIe Gen 2. The Intel part includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 2500), while the AMD part has no integrated graphics.

The process node advantage goes to Intel (22 nm versus 32 nm), and the transistor count advantage goes to AMD (2,400 million versus 1,400 million). Despite those extra transistors, the AMD chip cannot convert its hardware resources into benchmark victories.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

All five recorded head-to-head benchmarks favor the Intel Core i5-3550. The margins are consistent, ranging from 20.6% to 21.1%, which suggests a systematic performance advantage rather than test-specific noise.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-3550 scores 410 against the Opteron's 340, a 20.6% lead. This is notable because the Opteron has twice the core count, yet the Intel processor with half the cores still outperforms it in a multi-threaded workload. The Bulldozer architecture's module-based design appears to deliver less effective throughput per core than Ivy Bridge's conventional core design.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i5-3550 scores 1710 against 1418, again a 20.6% margin. The single-core test in R20 shows the i5-3550 at 241 versus 199, a 21.1% lead. This single-core gap is the largest recorded advantage, highlighting the per-thread performance difference between the two architectures.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-3550 scores 4073 against 3377, a 20.6% margin. The R23 single-core test shows 575 versus 476, a 20.8% lead. The consistency across R15, R20, and R23 reinforces that the performance gap is stable across workload generations and does not depend on a specific benchmark version.

The average benchmark score for the i5-3550 is 1178, placing it at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs. The Opteron 6212 has an average score of 1162, also at the 33rd percentile. Despite the head-to-head margins of roughly 21%, the average scores appear close because the average includes a broader set of workloads and the Opteron's nearest rivals cluster tightly around it.

The nearest rivals for the i5-3550 include the Intel Core i5-4440 (average score 1179, 0.1% higher), the Intel Core i3-7320 (1173, 0.4% lower), the Intel Core i7-3635QM (1170, 0.7% lower), and the Intel Core i5-2400 (1187, 0.7% higher). The nearest rivals for the Opteron 6212 include the Intel Core i5-3450 (1166, 0.4% higher), the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312 (1156, 0.5% lower), the AMD Opteron 6220 (1168, 0.5% higher), and the Intel Core i5-3570S (1169, 0.6% higher).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-3550 | AMD Opteron 6212 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 77 W | 115 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1155 | AMD Socket G34 |

| Process node | 22 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 2,400 million |

| Die size | 160 mm² | 2x 315 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 768 KB |

| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per module) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (per die) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 2500 | None |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Launch MSRP | $194 | $266 |

The clock speed advantage belongs to Intel, with both base and boost clocks roughly 0.7 GHz higher. The core count and thread count advantage belongs to AMD, with double the resources. The TDP advantage belongs to Intel, requiring 38 W less power. The memory bandwidth advantage belongs to AMD, with double the theoretical throughput. The ECC support belongs exclusively to AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i5-3550 has a base clock of 3.30 GHz, while the AMD Opteron 6212 has a base clock of 2.60 GHz.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-3550 wins in all recorded multi-core benchmarks despite having only 4 cores and 4 threads versus the Opteron's 8 cores and 8 threads. The margins are 20.6% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests.

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 6212 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Opteron 6212 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-3550 does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Opteron 6212 has a quad-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel Core i5-3550 has a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-3550 includes Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics. The AMD Opteron 6212 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor was released earlier?

A: The AMD Opteron 6212 was released on November 13, 2011. The Intel Core i5-3550 was released on April 28, 2012.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-3550 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its victories span single-core and multi-core workloads, with margins between 20.6% and 21.1%. The win count is 5 for Intel and 0 for AMD in the head-to-head benchmark suite.

The i5-3550 is the better choice for single-threaded performance, where its 21.1% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core and 20.8% lead in R23 single-core demonstrate a clear architectural advantage. It also wins in multi-threaded workloads despite having half the core count, which indicates that each Intel core delivers substantially more effective throughput than each AMD module.

The i5-3550 also wins on efficiency, with a 77 W TDP versus the Opteron's 115 W. It wins on process technology, using a 22 nm node versus 32 nm. It wins on PCIe generation, offering Gen 3 versus Gen 2. It wins on integrated graphics, offering Intel HD 2500 versus no graphics at all. It wins on launch MSRP, at $194 versus $266.

The AMD Opteron 6212 wins in the specifications that matter for server and workstation deployments. It offers ECC memory support, which the Intel part lacks. It offers quad-channel memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, double the Intel part's 25.6 GB/s. It offers more cores and threads (8 versus 4), more total cache capacity across L2 and L3, and it targets the server/workstation market segment.

For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, such as certain server-side data processing tasks, the Opteron's quad-channel interface provides a theoretical advantage. For workloads that require ECC memory for data integrity, the Opteron is the only option between the two. For workloads that need more physical cores for parallel scaling, the Opteron has the raw core count.

However, the recorded benchmark data shows no scenario where the Opteron's specifications translate into a measured performance win. The database records all five head-to-head benchmarks as Intel victories. The Opteron's advantages remain theoretical in the specification sheet, not demonstrated in the benchmark results.

The practical conclusion is straightforward. For desktop use, general computing, single-threaded applications, and even multi-threaded rendering workloads, the i5-3550 delivers superior measured performance. For server deployments requiring ECC memory, high memory bandwidth, or a specific platform socket, the Opteron 6212 offers the required features, but users should expect lower measured performance in the recorded Cinebench tests.