AMD Opteron 6234 vs Intel Core i7-3635QM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided picture. The Intel Core i7-3635QM wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, taking all five recorded Cinebench tests. The AMD Opteron 6234 records zero wins in these direct comparisons. This does not mean the Opteron lacks purpose, but its strengths lie outside the specific workloads captured in these measurements.

The Intel processor dominates in multi-threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 408 against the Opteron's 348, a 14.7% advantage. That margin repeats almost exactly across Cinebench R20 multicore (1703 versus 1453) and Cinebench R23 multicore (4057 versus 3461). The consistency of this 14.7% gap across three generations of the Cinebench test suggests a structural performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Single-core performance tells the same story. The Core i7-3635QM leads by 15% in Cinebench R20 single-core (240 versus 204) and by 14.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (572 versus 488). This is significant because single-core results often indicate responsiveness in lightly threaded applications, and the Intel part wins there decisively.

The Opteron 6234, for its part, is a server and workstation processor. Its 12 cores and 12 threads target throughput in heavily parallel server workloads, database queries, and virtualization. The database shows it sits at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, matching the Intel part's percentile exactly. The average benchmark score for the Opteron is 1191, while the Core i7-3635QM averages 1170. These averages, which include a broader range of tests than the head-to-head list, show the Opteron actually holds a slight overall edge in aggregate performance across the full benchmark suite. The Intel chip wins the specific Cinebench comparisons, but the recorded data indicates the Opteron's wider core count helps it in other measured scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Opteron 6234 uses the Bulldozer architecture under the Interlagos codename, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,400 million transistors across a dual-die design measuring 2x 315 mm². The Intel Core i7-3635QM uses the Ivy Bridge architecture, built on a 22 nm process at Intel, with 1,480 million transistors on a single 160 mm² die.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Opteron provides 12 physical cores with 12 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part offers 4 cores and 8 threads, using Hyper-Threading to double its thread count. Despite having one-third the physical cores, the Intel chip matches or beats the Opteron in the recorded multi-threaded Cinebench tests.

Clock behavior also differs. Both run at a 2.40 GHz base clock, but the Intel chip boosts to 3.40 GHz while the Opteron reaches only 3.00 GHz. That 400 MHz boost advantage helps explain the single-core results. Power consumption tells a contrasting story: the Opteron carries a 115 W TDP, while the Intel mobile chip draws only 45 W. The Intel part delivers superior benchmark results at less than half the thermal envelope.

Cache hierarchies reflect the different design targets. The Opteron has 768 KB of L1 cache, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support also differs: the Opteron uses quad-channel DDR3 with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC support, while the Intel part uses dual-channel DDR3 without ECC. The Opteron's memory bandwidth is a server-grade feature, and it is the only processor here with ECC capability. The Intel chip includes integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics; the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all. The Opteron uses AMD Socket G34 with PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1224.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for Intel. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core i7-3635QM scores 408 against the Opteron's 348, a 14.7% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore repeats the pattern: 1703 versus 1453, again 14.7%. Cinebench R23 multicore follows with 4057 versus 3461, a third consecutive 14.7% margin. The consistency is remarkable, suggesting the Intel architecture scales its advantage uniformly across rendering generations.

Single-core tests show a similar but slightly larger gap in one case. Cinebench R20 single-core has the Intel chip at 240 and the Opteron at 204, a 15% difference, the largest margin in any recorded test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 572 versus 488, a 14.7% gap. The Intel processor also holds recorded wins in Geekbench tests not part of the head-to-head table: a multicore score of 1790 and a single-core score of 532. The Opteron's benchmark list includes no Geekbench entries, so those comparisons cannot be drawn from the database.

Context from the nearest rivals helps position these scores. The Opteron 6234 has an average benchmark score of 1191, sitting within 0.2% of the Intel Core i5-4460T at 1190, the Intel Core i7-8665UE at 1193, and the Intel Core i3-4170 at 1193. The Core i7-3635QM averages 1170, within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-2960XM at 1169, the Intel Core i5-3570S at 1169, and the AMD Opteron 6220 at 1168. Both processors land at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically indistinguishable in overall standing despite their very different architectures.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Core i7-3635QM wins every recorded multi-core Cinebench test. It leads by 14.7% in R15 (408 versus 348), R20 (1703 versus 1453), and R23 (4057 versus 3461).

Q: Does the Opteron 6234 have more cores than the Core i7-3635QM?

A: Yes. The Opteron has 12 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel chip has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite this, the Intel processor wins all direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons.

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Core i7-3635QM. It leads by 15% in Cinebench R20 single-core (240 versus 204) and by 14.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (572 versus 488).

Q: What memory features does the Opteron support that the Intel chip does not?

A: The Opteron supports quad-channel DDR3 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Intel chip uses dual-channel DDR3 without ECC support.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-3635QM includes Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics. The AMD Opteron 6234 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Opteron averages 1191 across its recorded benchmarks, slightly ahead of the Core i7-3635QM's 1170. Both sit at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Opteron 6234 | Intel Core i7-3635QM |

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

| Cores | 12 | 4 |

| Threads | 12 | 8 |

| Boost Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 115 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket G34 | Intel BGA 1224 |

| Architecture | Bulldozer | Ivy Bridge |

| Codename | Interlagos | Ivy Bridge |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 1,480 million |

| Die Size | 2x 315 mm² | 160 mm² |

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

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

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

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Intel HD 4000 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2011-11-13 | 2012-08-31 |

| Launch MSRP | $377 | Not recorded |

Both processors share a 2.40 GHz base clock, use DDR3 memory, and have locked multipliers. The Opteron supports PCIe Gen 2; the Intel chip's PCIe support is not recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i7-3635QM as the stronger performer in the workloads measured by the database. It wins all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons with margins between 14.7% and 15%. It achieves this with 4 cores and 8 threads against the Opteron's 12 cores and 12 threads, with a 45 W TDP against the Opteron's 115 W, and with a 3.40 GHz boost clock against the Opteron's 3.00 GHz. For anyone choosing between these two based on rendering performance, single-threaded responsiveness, or power efficiency, the Intel part is the clear choice.

The AMD Opteron 6234 nevertheless has a defined role. Its quad-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support make it suitable for server and workstation environments where memory reliability and throughput matter more than Cinebench scores. Its 12 physical cores provide parallel throughput capacity for server workloads that scale across many threads. The database shows its average benchmark score of 1191 edges out the Intel chip's 1170, indicating that across a broader benchmark set, the Opteron holds its own.

The verdict depends on context. For mobile or general computing, the Core i7-3635QM wins on every recorded head-to-head metric and consumes 70 W less power. For server deployments requiring ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, and high core counts, the Opteron 6234 remains a legitimate option despite its age. The Intel chip offers better measured performance in the recorded tests; the Opteron offers infrastructure features the Intel part cannot match.