CPU Comparison

The benchmark data places the AMD Opteron 6274 and Intel Core i3-9100TE in a statistical tie by average score, with the Opteron leading by a razor-thin 0.1% margin (1387 vs 1386). However, that aggregate parity masks a complete sweep: the AMD part wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with victory margins ranging from 22.9% to 23.6%. The Intel chip counters with a higher boost clock, a much newer architecture, and integrated graphics, but in pure compute benchmarks, the 16-core Opteron consistently outperforms the 4-core i3 by roughly a quarter.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Opteron 6274 dominates every single Cinebench test in the comparison set. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD processor scores 483 against the Intel’s 393, a 22.9% advantage. The single-core R15 result is even more lopsided in relative terms: 68 vs 55, a 23.6% margin. This pattern holds across newer Cinebench versions. In R20 multicore, the Opteron posts 2014 versus 1638, a 23% lead, while the single-core run shows 284 vs 231, also a 22.9% gap. The R23 tests repeat the trend: 4796 vs 3900 in multicore (23% ahead) and 677 vs 550 in single-core (23.1% ahead).

The consistency of the deltas is striking. Whether the workload is single-threaded or fully parallel, the AMD chip maintains a margin between 22.9% and 23.6% across all six tests. This uniformity suggests that the Opteron’s advantage is not workload-specific but inherent to its design. The 16-core Bulldozer part simply delivers more sustained compute throughput than the 4-core Coffee Lake processor, even in tests that typically favor newer cores with higher instructions per clock.

Interestingly, the Intel i3-9100TE has additional Geekbench scores in its benchmark list, 3214 multicore and 1105 single-core, but the head-to-head table contains no Geekbench entries. The database only compares the six Cinebench results, and the AMD wins all of them. The average benchmark scores (1387 for AMD, 1386 for Intel) are nearly identical because the Opteron lacks Geekbench data, pulling its average down relative to the Intel part, which has more data points.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 edges out the Intel Core i3-9100TE by a single point, 1387 to 1386, a 0.1% difference. This places both in the 37th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the Intel i3-9100TE win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The Intel part loses all six Cinebench tests. The AMD Opteron 6274 wins Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multicore configurations.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two chips?

A: The biggest delta is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the AMD Opteron 6274 leads by 23.6% (68 vs 55). The smallest margin is 22.9%, seen in R15 multicore and R20 single-core.

Q: How do their core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9100TE has 4 cores and 4 threads. Both run at a 2.20 GHz base clock, but the Intel boosts to 3.20 GHz versus the AMD’s 3.10 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the AMD Opteron 6274 and the Intel Core i3-9100TE list ECC memory as supported, though they use different memory types (DDR3 for AMD, DDR4 for Intel).

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-9100TE includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Opteron 6274 has no integrated graphics listed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Opteron 6274 uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It is a server-class part with 16 cores arranged in eight modules, each sharing a 2 MB L2 cache. The chip is physically large, with a die size of 2x 315 mm² and a transistor count of 2,400 million. Its cache hierarchy is unusual: 768 KB of shared L1, 2 MB per module for L2, and 8 MB per die for L3, resulting in a massive total cache footprint across the dual-die design.

The Intel Core i3-9100TE, by contrast, uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process at Intel. It is a mainstream desktop chip with 4 cores and a conventional cache layout: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The die size is 126 mm², considerably smaller than the AMD’s dual-die setup. Intel’s design emphasizes higher core efficiency with a newer process node, while AMD’s Bulldozer design emphasized raw core count and throughput.

Memory support highlights another generational divide. The AMD part uses DDR3 with a quad-channel memory bus delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel chip uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus offering 38.4 GB/s. Despite having fewer channels, the Intel part’s newer memory standard narrows the bandwidth gap. The PCIe implementation also differs: AMD uses PCIe Gen 2, while Intel provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The market positioning could not be more different. The Opteron 6274 targets server and workstation workloads, while the i3-9100TE is a desktop processor. The AMD chip was released in November 2011, the Intel in March 2019. Both are end-of-life products now, but they represent different eras of computing: AMD’s early 2010s multi-core push versus Intel’s late 2010s efficiency-focused mainstream parts.

Specification Differences

The core counts are the most obvious difference: 16 cores and 16 threads for the AMD Opteron 6274 versus 4 cores and 4 threads for the Intel Core i3-9100TE. Both have a 2.20 GHz base clock, but the Intel boosts higher at 3.20 GHz compared to the AMD’s 3.10 GHz. Power consumption diverges sharply: the AMD has a 115 W TDP, while the Intel sips power at 35 W.

Sockets are incompatible: the AMD uses Socket G34, the Intel uses Socket 1151. The process node differs by two generations, with the AMD at 32 nm and the Intel at 14 nm. Die size and transistor counts tell the story of physical scale: the AMD measures 2x 315 mm² with 2,400 million transistors, while the Intel is a single 126 mm² die with no transistor count listed.

Cache configurations are structured differently. The AMD has 768 KB shared L1, 2 MB per module L2, and 8 MB per die L3. The Intel has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: DDR3 quad-channel with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth for AMD versus DDR4 dual-channel with 38.4 GB/s for Intel. The AMD has no integrated graphics; the Intel includes UHD Graphics 630. PCIe generation also differs: Gen 2 for AMD, Gen 3 with 16 lanes for Intel.

Market segments and launch dates separate them further. The AMD is a server/workstation part released in 2011 with a launch MSRP of $639. The Intel is a desktop part released in 2019 with a launch MSRP of $122. Both have locked multipliers and are end-of-life.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload. For raw multi-threaded compute, the AMD Opteron 6274 is the unambiguous winner, outperforming the Intel Core i3-9100TE by 23% in Cinebench R23 multicore (4796 vs 3900). The AMD also wins single-core tests by a similar margin, which is notable given that single-core performance typically favors newer architectures. The 16-core Bulldozer chip simply delivers more compute in every Cinebench scenario.

However, the Intel i3-9100TE is not without merits. It has a 65% lower TDP (35 W vs 115 W), a higher boost clock (3.20 GHz vs 3.10 GHz), and includes integrated graphics. Its DDR4 memory support and PCIe Gen 3 provide a more modern platform foundation. For a system with strict power or thermal constraints, or one that needs integrated display output, the Intel part is the sensible choice despite its benchmark deficit.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, which suggests that in a mixed workload environment, the two chips would perform similarly overall. But the benchmark composition matters: the AMD has no Geekbench scores, so its average is based solely on Cinebench results, where it wins every comparison. The Intel’s average includes Geekbench data, which lowers its Cinebench-centric average. Users who prioritize Cinebench-style rendering tasks should favor the AMD, while those who value platform features and efficiency should lean toward the Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6274 wins every benchmark category in the head-to-head comparison: all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, both single-core and multicore. Its strengths are in sustained compute throughput, where 16 cores provide a 23% advantage in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads. This makes it suited for rendering, scientific computing, or any application that scales with core count. Its quad-channel DDR3 memory provides 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which benefits memory-intensive workloads despite the older memory standard.

The Intel Core i3-9100TE wins on platform attributes rather than benchmark scores. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for low-power or passively cooled systems, where the AMD’s 115 W TDP would be prohibitive. The integrated UHD Graphics 630 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic display scenarios. Its DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3 interface provide a more modern foundation for system builders. The 3.20 GHz boost clock gives it a slight frequency advantage, though the benchmark data shows this does not translate into a performance win.

In practical terms, the Opteron 6274 is the compute champion, while the i3-9100TE is the efficiency and integration champion. The AMD wins 6 out of 6 benchmarks; the Intel wins 0 out of 6. But the Intel’s launch MSRP of $122 versus the AMD’s $639, combined with its lower power draw and integrated graphics, means the choice ultimately depends on whether raw performance or platform efficiency matters more for the intended use case. For a server or workstation running parallel workloads, the Opteron’s benchmark sweep is decisive. For a desktop with modest performance needs and tight power budget, the i3-9100TE’s features outweigh its benchmark deficits.