AMD Opteron 6238 vs Intel Core i7-3740QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture across all six Cinebench comparisons: the Intel Core i7-3740QM wins every single head-to-head test, though by surprisingly narrow margins given the architectural gulf between the two processors. The AMD Opteron 6238, a 12-core server part, never manages to take a single victory.

Starting with multi-threaded workloads, the Intel Core i7-3740QM posts a Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 489 against the Opteron's 481, a delta of -1.6% from AMD's perspective. That pattern repeats almost identically in Cinebench R20, where Intel scores 2040 versus AMD's 2008, again a -1.6% difference. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result continues the trend: Intel at 4859, AMD at 4781, with the same -1.6% delta. The consistency is striking — across three generations of the Cinebench suite, the margin never moves beyond a single decimal point.

Single-threaded results show a slightly larger gap in Intel's favor. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i7-3740QM scores 69 against the Opteron's 67, a -2.9% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 288 versus 283, a -1.7% difference, while Cinebench R23 single-core lands at 686 versus 675, another -1.6% margin. The single-core advantage is more pronounced in the older R15 test, but the overall pattern holds: Intel's per-thread performance is consistently ahead.

What makes these numbers notable is the context. The Opteron 6238 has three times the physical cores (12 versus 4) and draws 115W TDP against Intel's 45W. Yet in a pure multi-threaded render workload, the 4-core/8-thread mobile chip edges out the 12-core server processor in every test. The Intel chip's 3.70 GHz boost clock against AMD's 3.20 GHz boost, combined with the Ivy Bridge architecture's superior per-clock efficiency, appears to more than compensate for the core count deficit.

The aggregate benchmark picture reinforces this. The Opteron 6238 has an average benchmark score of 1383 across its tested workloads, while the i7-3740QM averages 1378. That 5-point difference in AMD's favor is well within noise — the Opteron's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3615QE at 1381 (a 0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i3-9100TE at 1386 (-0.2% delta). The i7-3740QM's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 at 1379 (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U at 1379 (-0.1% delta). Both processors sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs, placing them in essentially identical performance tiers overall.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-3740QM wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with deltas ranging from -1.6% to -2.9% from AMD's perspective. For any workload measured by Cinebench — whether single-threaded or multi-threaded — Intel's 4-core/8-thread mobile chip outperforms AMD's 12-core server processor.

That said, the margins are small. A 1.6% difference in multi-core performance is unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use, and the Opteron's 12 physical cores may still offer advantages in workloads that scale differently than Cinebench's rendering engine. The aggregate average benchmark scores — 1383 for AMD versus 1378 for Intel — are effectively tied, differing by less than half a percent.

The practical verdict depends on context. For a mobile workstation or laptop replacement where the i7-3740QM's 45W TDP and integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics make it a self-contained solution, the choice is clear. For a server or workstation where the Opteron 6238's quad-channel DDR3 memory support, ECC memory capability, and Socket G34 platform offer enterprise features the mobile chip simply cannot match, the AMD part remains viable despite its slight benchmark deficit.

Users who prioritize raw Cinebench scores should select the Intel Core i7-3740QM. Users who need ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, or a server-class platform should select the AMD Opteron 6238, accepting a marginal performance trade-off.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies from different eras and market segments. The AMD Opteron 6238, released on November 13, 2011, is built on the Bulldozer architecture with the Interlagos codename, manufactured on GlobalFoundries' 32 nm process. It packs 2,400 million transistors across a dual-die design measuring 2x 315 mm². The Intel Core i7-3740QM, released September 2, 2012, uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on Intel's 22 nm process, with 1,400 million transistors on a single 160 mm² die.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The Opteron offers 12 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost to 3.20 GHz. Its cache hierarchy reflects the Bulldozer module design: 768 KB of L1, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The i7-3740QM presents 4 cores and 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, with a 2.70 GHz base clock and 3.70 GHz boost. Its cache layout is per-core: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3.

Memory subsystems tell a story of different priorities. The Opteron 6238 supports DDR3 over a quad-channel memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and it enables ECC memory for error correction in server environments. The i7-3740QM uses a dual-channel memory bus, does not support ECC, and its memory bandwidth figure is not listed in the available data. The AMD part also includes PCI-Express Gen 2 support while the Intel chip's PCIe generation is not specified.

The TDP contrast is stark: 115 watts for the Opteron versus 45 watts for the i7-3740QM. The AMD chip is an end-of-life server product with a launch MSRP of $455, while the Intel part is a mobile processor with integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics — a feature completely absent from the Opteron. The sockets differ as expected: AMD Socket G34 for the server chip, Intel BGA 1224 for the mobile chip. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 6238 win any benchmark against the Intel Core i7-3740QM?

A: No. In the six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons available, the Intel Core i7-3740QM wins all six. The AMD Opteron 6238 records zero wins.

Q: How close are the multi-core scores between the two processors?

A: Very close. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 489 versus AMD's 481. In R20, Intel scores 2040 versus 2008. In R23, Intel scores 4859 versus 4781. Each margin is -1.6% from AMD's perspective.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: The Intel chip leads in all single-core tests. Cinebench R15 shows 69 versus 67 (-2.9%), R20 shows 288 versus 283 (-1.7%), and R23 shows 686 versus 675 (-1.6%).

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Opteron 6238 has 12 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i7-3740QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having three times the core count, the AMD part does not win any multi-core benchmark.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Opteron 6238 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-3740QM does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do these processors compare in overall benchmark percentile?

A: Both processors sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs. The AMD Opteron 6238 has an average benchmark score of 1383, while the Intel Core i7-3740QM has an average of 1378.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Opteron 6238 wins on:

• Aggregate benchmark average: 1383 versus 1378, a marginal but measurable edge in the overall score across all tested workloads.
• Core count: 12 physical cores versus 4, offering more parallel execution resources for workloads that can utilize them beyond Cinebench's scaling.
• Memory bandwidth: Quad-channel DDR3 support delivering 51.2 GB/s versus the Intel chip's unspecified dual-channel bandwidth.
• ECC memory support: A critical feature for error-sensitive server and workstation environments that the Intel mobile chip cannot provide.
• Market segment fit: As a server/workstation part on Socket G34, it belongs in enterprise platforms with appropriate infrastructure.

Intel Core i7-3740QM wins on:

• Every Cinebench benchmark: All six head-to-head tests, with wins ranging from -1.6% to -2.9% deltas.
• Single-core performance: Consistently ahead in R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, with boosts up to 3.70 GHz versus AMD's 3.20 GHz.
• Multi-core performance despite fewer cores: Wins all three multi-core tests while using only 4 cores/8 threads against AMD's 12 cores/12 threads.
• Power efficiency: 45W TDP versus 115W, less than half the power draw for superior benchmark results.
• Integrated graphics: Includes Intel HD 4000, providing display output capability without a discrete GPU.
• Smaller process node: 22 nm versus 32 nm, contributing to better efficiency and thermal characteristics.

The use-case split is clear. For mobile computing, compact systems, or any environment where power draw and integrated graphics matter, the Intel Core i7-3740QM is the superior choice. For server deployments requiring ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, or high core counts for non-Cinebench workloads, the AMD Opteron 6238 remains relevant despite its benchmark deficit. The data shows a remarkable outcome: a 45-watt mobile processor from 2012 outperforms a 115-watt 12-core server processor from 2011 in every measured render test, yet the server part retains its niche through platform features that the mobile chip cannot replicate.