AMD Opteron 6238 vs Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a remarkably consistent picture across every Cinebench iteration. Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons against AMD Opteron 6238. The margins are narrow but uniform, suggesting a fundamental per-core advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

In Cinebench R15, the Intel part scores 488 in multicore against 481 for the AMD, a 1.5% lead. The single-core result is equally tight: 68 versus 67, again a 1.5% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the Intel chip posts 2034 multicore and 287 single-core, while the AMD Opteron manages 2008 and 283 respectively, translating to deltas of 1.3% and 1.4%. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where Intel leads 4845 to 4781 in multicore (1.3%) and 684 to 675 in single-core (1.3%).

What stands out is the consistency: the delta never exceeds 1.5% in any test. This is not a case of one architecture crushing another in a specific scenario. Instead, the data implies a steady, repeatable edge for the Intel processor across all rendering workloads captured in the database. The AMD Opteron 6238, despite having three times the core count, never manages to flip a single result. That is a striking outcome when considering the raw hardware disparity.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative. Intel's average is 1401, placing it in the 37th percentile among all CPUs. AMD's average is 1383, sitting at the 36th percentile. The nearest rivals for Intel include the Xeon E-2104G at 1402 (0% delta) and the Core i5-6500TE at 1399 (0.1% delta). For AMD, the closest competition is the Opteron 6366 HE at 1379 (0.3% delta) and the Opteron 6274 at 1387 (-0.3% delta). These adjacent scores show that both processors are clustered in a similar performance tier, yet Intel holds a slight but decisive edge in every direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

The underlying designs could hardly be more different. Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 uses the Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process node, manufactured by Intel with 1,750 million transistors on a 122 mm² die. It is a single-die, monolithic design with 4 cores and 4 threads. The cache hierarchy is per-core: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. This is a classic high-IPC layout where each core has dedicated resources.

AMD Opteron 6238 takes the Bulldozer approach, codenamed Interlagos, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 12 cores and 12 threads across two dies, each measuring 315 mm², for a combined 2,400 million transistors. The cache structure is module-based: 768 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. Bulldozer's design philosophy shares floating-point units between paired integer cores, which historically reduces per-thread throughput compared to Intel's fully independent cores.

The process node difference is substantial: 14 nm versus 32 nm. That two-generation gap in lithography explains part of the performance density. Intel packs its 4 cores into 122 mm², while AMD spreads 12 cores across 630 mm² total. The transistor counts tell a similar story: AMD has more transistors (2,400 million versus 1,750 million) but uses them far less efficiently per core. The memory subsystem also diverges significantly. Intel supports both DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel bus delivering 34.1 GB/s. AMD is limited to DDR3 but uses a quad-channel interface for 51.2 GB/s, giving it a raw bandwidth advantage that the benchmark results do not translate into rendering wins.

Socket and platform compatibility differ completely: Intel uses Socket 1151 with PCIe Gen 3 (16 CPU lanes), while AMD uses Socket G34 with PCIe Gen 2. Both support ECC memory, but Intel's newer memory standard and PCIe generation reflect its later release date. The part numbers and production status confirm both are end-of-life, though Intel's release came in 2015 versus AMD's 2011.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clean sweep for Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 across all six Cinebench tests, so the win condition is straightforward: any workload represented by these benchmarks favors Intel. The margins, however, are small enough that the AMD Opteron 6238 is not dramatically outclassed. In multicore tests, the AMD part's 12 cores almost compensate for its per-core weakness, coming within 1.3% to 1.5% of Intel's 4-core result. This suggests that heavily threaded workloads that scale well could see the AMD chip close the gap further, though the recorded data does not show it doing so in any Cinebench iteration.

Where AMD holds a theoretical advantage is in raw memory bandwidth. The quad-channel DDR3 bus at 51.2 GB/s is 50% higher than Intel's 34.1 GB/s dual-channel implementation. Workloads that are memory-bandwidth bound, such as large data streaming or certain database operations, could favor the AMD platform despite its lower per-core performance. The database does not include such tests, so this remains an inference from the specification differences.

Intel's wins are most pronounced in single-core scenarios, where its architectural efficiency and higher clock speeds (3.00 GHz base, 3.50 GHz boost versus 2.60 GHz base, 3.20 GHz boost) produce a consistent edge. For legacy software or lightly threaded applications, the Xeon E3-1220 v5 is the clear choice based on the recorded metrics. The AMD part's appeal would rest on scenarios requiring many concurrent threads with high memory throughput, but the benchmark evidence does not support a rendering victory for it.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 | AMD Opteron 6238 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Threads | 4 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 80 W | 115 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket G34 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Bulldozer |

| Codename | Skylake-DT | Interlagos |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,750 million | 2,400 million |

| Die Size | 122 mm² | 2x 315 mm² |

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

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR3 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

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

| Release Date | 2015-10-18 | 2011-11-13 |

| Launch MSRP | $203 | $455 |

The table highlights the core count disparity (12 versus 4), the clock speed advantage for Intel (3.50 GHz boost versus 3.20 GHz), the process node gap (14 nm versus 32 nm), and the memory architecture differences. Intel's TDP of 80 W is notably lower than AMD's 115 W, which aligns with Intel's smaller die and fewer cores. The launch MSRP difference is significant, with Intel at $203 and AMD at $455, though pricing considerations are not part of this analysis.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 scores 4845 versus AMD Opteron 6238's 4781, a 1.3% lead for Intel.

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 6238's 12 cores give it an advantage in any benchmark?

A: No. Despite having three times the core count, AMD loses all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with the smallest deficit being 1.3% in R20 and R23 multicore.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R20?

A: Intel scores 287, AMD scores 283, giving Intel a 1.4% advantage.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: Intel uses dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD uses quad-channel DDR3 with 51.2 GB/s. AMD has higher raw bandwidth but does not translate this into Cinebench wins.

Q: What are the TDP figures for each processor?

A: Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 has a TDP of 80 W, while AMD Opteron 6238 has a TDP of 115 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: Intel reaches 3.50 GHz boost, while AMD reaches 3.20 GHz boost.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare?

A: Intel averages 1401 points (37th percentile), AMD averages 1383 points (36th percentile). Intel's nearest rival is the Xeon E-2104G at 1402, AMD's is the Opteron 6366 HE at 1379.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow winner: Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 outperforms AMD Opteron 6238 in every recorded benchmark. The margins are consistently between 1.3% and 1.5%, which means the Intel chip is faster but not overwhelmingly so. For anyone choosing between these two based on Cinebench rendering scores, Intel is the correct pick across all six tests.

The AMD Opteron 6238's 12 cores and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are notable specifications, yet they do not produce a single benchmark victory. The Bulldozer architecture's per-core efficiency, as measured here, lags behind Skylake to such a degree that the core count advantage is nullified. The process node difference (32 nm versus 14 nm) and clock speed disadvantage (2.60/3.20 GHz versus 3.00/3.50 GHz) explain the outcome.

The Intel part also offers a lower TDP (80 W versus 115 W) and a smaller die (122 mm² versus 2x 315 mm²), making it the more power-efficient design. Its support for DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3 provides a more modern platform foundation. The AMD chip's quad-channel memory bus is its only clear specification advantage, but the recorded benchmarks do not show it converting that into performance wins.

For users prioritizing the recorded Cinebench scores, the choice is unambiguous: Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5. The AMD Opteron 6238 remains a viable alternative only in hypothetical scenarios involving memory-bandwidth-intensive workloads outside the database's coverage, but no such evidence exists in these measurements. The verdict from the data is that Intel wins on every measured metric, and the margin, while small, is consistent across all Cinebench versions.