AMD Opteron 6234 vs Intel Pentium Silver N6005 Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Pentium Silver N6005 wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark against the AMD Opteron 6234. In five Cinebench tests, the N6005 takes all five wins, with deltas ranging from 28.4% to 28.9%. Despite having only 4 cores and 4 threads versus the Opteron's 12 cores and 12 threads, the Pentium Silver's modern Tremont architecture and 10 nm process deliver far better per-thread performance. The Opteron 6234, a 2011-era server part on 32 nm with Bulldozer cores, cannot keep up in any measured workload.

If you are choosing between these two for a new build, the N6005 is the pick for nearly all scenarios: it wins every benchmark, uses dramatically less power (10 W TDP versus 115 W TDP), and supports DDR4/LPDDR4 memory. The Opteron 6234 only makes sense if you specifically need ECC memory support, quad-channel DDR3, or a server/workstation platform with 12 physical cores for legacy threaded workloads that scale beyond what the benchmarks here reflect. But based strictly on the recorded Cinebench results, the N6005 is the faster CPU in both single-core and multi-core tests.

The percentile data reinforces this: the N6005 sits at the 34th percentile of all CPUs, while the Opteron sits at the 33rd percentile. The average benchmark score difference is narrow (1218 versus 1191), but the head-to-head Cinebench results show a consistent and decisive N6005 advantage. For a low-power mobile or embedded system, the N6005 is clearly superior. For a server that needs ECC and many physical cores, the Opteron still has a role, but not a performance one based on these numbers.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Pentium Silver N6005 uses the Tremont architecture, codenamed Jasper Lake, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. Its cache layout is 64 KB of L1 per core, 1.5 MB of shared L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. The die size is 63.8 mm², and it is fabricated by Intel. It supports DDR4 and LPDDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory. The integrated UHD Graphics 32EU is present, and the PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

The AMD Opteron 6234 uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, built on GlobalFoundries' 32 nm process. It has 12 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. Its cache layout is 768 KB of L1, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The die is dual-die, with each die at 315 mm², and it contains 2,400 million transistors. It supports DDR3 memory in quad-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It does support ECC memory. There is no integrated graphics, and the PCIe interface is Gen 2. The Opteron is a server/workstation part, while the N6005 is a mobile part.

The architectural gap is stark. The N6005 is a modern low-power design with efficient Tremont cores, while the Opteron is a high-TDP server chip from the Bulldozer era. The N6005's 4 cores are individually much faster than the Opteron's 12 cores, which is why it wins even multi-threaded tests despite having a third of the core count. The Opteron's advantage lies in ECC support, quad-channel memory, and physical core count for legacy server workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are consistent across every recorded test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N6005 scores 447 versus the Opteron's 348, a 28.4% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the N6005 scores 1866 versus 1453, again a 28.4% delta. Single-core tests show the same pattern: Cinebench R20 single-core has the N6005 at 263 versus 204, a 28.9% lead, and Cinebench R23 single-core has 627 versus 488, a 28.5% lead. The largest multi-core test, Cinebench R23 multi-core, shows 4444 versus 3461, another 28.4% gap.

The consistency is notable. Every head-to-head result lands between 28.4% and 28.9%, which suggests the N6005's architectural advantage scales uniformly across single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The Opteron's extra 8 cores do not compensate for the per-core performance deficit. Even in a heavily threaded test like Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 4-core N6005 beats the 12-core Opteron by a wide margin.

The N6005 also has recorded Geekbench scores: 1469 multi-core and 564 single-core. The Opteron has no Geekbench scores in the database, so no comparison is possible there. But the Cinebench results alone make the winner clear: the N6005 is faster in every measured workload.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The N6005 averages 1218, while the Opteron averages 1191, a gap of only about 2.3%. This is because the averages include a broader set of tests beyond the head-to-head Cinebench suite, and the Opteron's nearest rivals (i5-4460T, i7-8665UE, i3-4170, Athlon PRO 300U) all cluster around 1190-1193. The N6005's nearest rivals (i7-3632QM, i5-2500, Xeon E5-1607 v3, i3-7300T) cluster around 1211-1220. But in the direct comparison, the N6005's wins are decisive.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Intel Pentium Silver N6005 wins all five recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests against the AMD Opteron 6234, with deltas between 28.4% and 28.9%. It is faster in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

Q: Does the Opteron's 12-core count give it a multi-threaded advantage?

A: No. Despite having 12 cores versus the N6005's 4 cores, the Opteron loses every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the N6005 scores 4444 versus the Opteron's 3461, a 28.4% lead for the Intel part.

Q: What about power consumption?

A: The N6005 has a 10 W TDP, while the Opteron 6234 has a 115 W TDP. The N6005 delivers higher performance while consuming a fraction of the power.

Q: Does the Opteron support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Opteron 6234 supports ECC memory, while the N6005 does not. The Opteron also uses quad-channel DDR3 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, versus the N6005's dual-channel DDR4/LPDDR4 with 46.9 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The N6005 has UHD Graphics 32EU. The Opteron 6234 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: How do their overall percentile rankings compare?

A: The N6005 sits at the 34th percentile of all CPUs, and the Opteron sits at the 33rd percentile. Their average benchmark scores are close (1218 versus 1191), but the head-to-head Cinebench results strongly favor the N6005.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Pentium Silver N6005 wins in every benchmark category recorded. It is faster in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. Its wins range from 28.4% to 28.9% over the Opteron. This makes it the clear choice for any workload that depends on CPU throughput as measured by Cinebench: rendering, encoding, general productivity, and single-threaded responsiveness. It also offers integrated graphics, a 10 W TDP, and support for DDR4/LPDDR4 memory, making it suitable for compact, low-power systems.

The AMD Opteron 6234 does not win any recorded benchmark. Its strengths lie outside the measured tests. It supports ECC memory, which the N6005 does not, making it relevant for servers or workstations where data integrity is critical. It has quad-channel DDR3 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, slightly higher than the N6005's 46.9 GB/s. It also has 12 physical cores, which could benefit legacy workloads that scale linearly across cores and are not represented in the Cinebench results here. Its market segment is server/workstation, and it uses the AMD Socket G34 platform.

If the workload is modern, single-thread-sensitive, or power-constrained, the N6005 is the obvious winner. If the requirement is ECC memory, a server platform, or maximum physical core count for a specific legacy application, the Opteron 6234 has a purpose, but the recorded data shows it loses every benchmark comparison.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Pentium Silver N6005 | AMD Opteron 6234 |

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

| Manufacturing process | 10 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Threads | 4 | 12 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

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

| L2 cache | 1.5 MB (shared) | 2 MB (per module) |

| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 8 MB (per die) |

| Memory support | DDR4, LPDDR4 | DDR3 |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 32EU | None |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1338 | AMD Socket G34 |

| TDP | 10 W | 115 W |

| Transistors | Not listed | 2,400 million |

| Die size | 63.8 mm² | 2x 315 mm² |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Production status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $377 |

The N6005 is built on a far more modern 10 nm process versus the Opteron's 32 nm, and it has a dramatically lower TDP of 10 W versus 115 W. The Opteron counters with more cores, more threads, higher base clock, ECC support, quad-channel memory, and a higher memory bandwidth figure. The N6005 has a higher boost clock, integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 3, and a much smaller die. Both are end-of-life products. The Opteron had a launch MSRP of $377; the N6005 has no recorded launch MSRP.