AMD Opteron 6274 vs Intel Core i7-3840QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3840QM and AMD Opteron 6274 sit at opposite ends of the computing spectrum: one is a mobile quad-core part from Intel, the other is a server chip with 16 physical cores from AMD. Yet their benchmark results land remarkably close together. Across six Cinebench tests, the Intel chip wins every single round, but by margins that range from 2.9% to 3.3%. The recorded data shows a consistent, narrow advantage for the Intel part, not a dominant blowout. The Opteron’s raw core count does not translate into a multi-core victory, which is the most surprising takeaway from this comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-3840QM wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where Intel scores 70 against AMD’s 68, a 2.9% lead. The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 4952 against AMD’s 4796, a 3.3% lead. Every other test falls between these two bounds.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 498, AMD scores 483, giving Intel a 3.1% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, Intel scores 2079, AMD scores 2014, a 3.2% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel scores 293, AMD scores 284, also a 3.2% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 699, AMD scores 677, a 3.2% lead.

What does this mean in practical terms? The Intel chip is faster in every measured workload, but the differences are small enough that they would barely register in real-world use. A 3% gap in a rendering benchmark is within the noise of system configuration, cooling, and background processes. The data does not show a clear winner for any specific task type; instead, it shows a uniform, slight edge for Intel across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. Intel’s average is 1416, AMD’s is 1387. Intel’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 2700U, AMD Ryzen Embedded R2314, and Intel Core i5-4460, all with an average score of 1415, just 0.1% behind. Intel’s other rival, the Core i7-2700K, averages 1419, which is 0.2% ahead. AMD’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-9100TE at 1386 (0.1% behind), the AMD Opteron 6238 at 1383 (0.3% behind), the Intel Core i7-3615QE at 1381 (0.5% behind), and the AMD Opteron 6366 HE at 1379 (0.6% behind). Both CPUs sit at the 37th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing.

The pattern is clear: this is a matchup of near-equals, with Intel holding a slim but consistent edge. The Opteron’s 16 cores do not overpower the Intel’s 4 cores and 8 threads in these tests. In fact, the multi-core margins (3.1% to 3.3%) are only slightly larger than the single-core margins (2.9% to 3.2%), suggesting that AMD’s core count advantage is almost entirely nullified by architectural inefficiencies.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-3840QM is built on Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture, using a 22 nm process node with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. It has 4 physical cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The cache layout is per-core: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

The AMD Opteron 6274 uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, built on a 32 nm process node at GlobalFoundries. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The cache layout is different: 768 KB shared L1, 2 MB per module L2, and 8 MB per die L3. The die size is listed as 2x 315 mm², and the transistor count is 2,400 million.

The process node difference is significant. Intel’s 22 nm process is newer and denser than AMD’s 32 nm process, which helps explain how a 4-core chip can match a 16-core chip in multi-threaded workloads. The Intel chip also has higher clock speeds: 2.80 GHz base versus 2.20 GHz, and 3.80 GHz boost versus 3.10 GHz. Higher clocks plus a more efficient architecture close the core-count gap.

The memory systems also differ. Both support DDR3, but Intel uses a dual-channel memory bus while AMD uses quad-channel. The AMD part has a stated memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure in the database. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. For server workloads that demand error correction, that is a decisive feature.

The Intel chip includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4000), while the AMD chip has none. The Intel part uses the Intel BGA 1224 socket, the AMD part uses AMD Socket G34. The AMD part is marked as end-of-life production status, while the Intel part has no status listed. The AMD part carries a launch MSRP of $639, which is the only price data available; the Intel part has no launch MSRP field.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i7-3840QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having four times the core count, the AMD chip loses every multi-core benchmark in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Why does the Intel chip win multi-core tests with fewer cores?

A: The Intel chip has a higher base clock (2.80 GHz versus 2.20 GHz) and boost clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.10 GHz), plus a newer 22 nm process node compared to AMD’s 32 nm node. The data shows Intel’s multi-core margins (3.1% to 3.3%) are only slightly larger than single-core margins, indicating the architecture is far more efficient per core.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Intel Core i7-3840QM has an average benchmark score of 1416, while the AMD Opteron 6274 averages 1387. That places Intel 2.0% ahead on average, consistent with the individual test margins.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Opteron 6274 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-3840QM does not. This makes the AMD chip suitable for error-sensitive server environments where the Intel chip would not qualify.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel Core i7-3840QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the AMD Opteron 6274 has a TDP of 115 watts. The Intel chip delivers comparable or better performance at less than half the power envelope.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-3840QM includes Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics. The AMD Opteron 6274 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for a server processor that relies on a discrete GPU or no display output.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The Intel part has 4 cores and 8 threads; the AMD part has 16 cores and 16 threads. Intel’s base clock is 2.80 GHz versus AMD’s 2.20 GHz. Intel’s boost clock is 3.80 GHz versus AMD’s 3.10 GHz. TDP is 45 watts for Intel, 115 watts for AMD.

The process node is 22 nm for Intel, 32 nm for AMD. The foundry is Intel for the Core i7, GlobalFoundries for the Opteron. Transistor counts are 1,400 million for Intel and 2,400 million for AMD. Die size is 160 mm² for Intel, 2x 315 mm² for AMD.

Cache layouts are entirely different. Intel uses 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. AMD uses 768 KB shared L1, 2 MB per module L2, and 8 MB per die L3. The memory bus is dual-channel for Intel, quad-channel for AMD. AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s; Intel has none listed. ECC memory is supported only on AMD. PCIe generation is Gen 2 for AMD, not listed for Intel.

Integrated graphics are present only on Intel (Intel HD 4000). The socket is Intel BGA 1224 versus AMD Socket G34. The market segment is Mobile for Intel, Server/Workstation for AMD. Production status is end-of-life for AMD, not listed for Intel. Release dates differ: Intel released on 2012-09-02, AMD on 2011-11-13. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $639; Intel has none. Part numbers are SR0UU for Intel, OS6274WKTGGGU for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3840QM wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set. This makes it the better choice for any workload measured by Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, whether single-core or multi-core. Its wins are consistent across all six tests, with margins between 2.9% and 3.3%. Additionally, the Intel chip has integrated graphics, a much lower TDP (45 watts versus 115 watts), and a newer process node. For mobile or compact systems where power and heat are constraints, the Intel part is the clear winner.

The AMD Opteron 6274 wins on features that matter for server deployments. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not. It has a quad-channel memory bus with a stated 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, which could benefit memory-heavy workloads that are not represented in the Cinebench results. It also has four times the physical cores (16 versus 4), which may be advantageous for workloads that scale linearly with core count but are not captured by the available benchmarks. The Opteron uses the AMD Socket G34 platform, which is a server-grade socket with support for larger memory configurations.

The AMD chip also has a higher transistor count (2,400 million versus 1,400 million) and a larger die, which reflects its server heritage. Its production status is end-of-life, meaning it is no longer manufactured, while the Intel chip’s production status is not listed. For new deployments, the Intel chip is the more current part.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i7-3840QM is the faster processor in every measured test. It wins all six Cinebench benchmarks, has a higher average score (1416 versus 1387), and does so while consuming 45 watts versus 115 watts. For anyone choosing between these two based on raw performance, the Intel chip is the better pick.

However, the verdict is not universal. The AMD Opteron 6274 is the only one of the two that supports ECC memory, which is non-negotiable for certain server environments where data corruption is unacceptable. It also offers quad-channel memory with a documented 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and its 16-core design may be better suited to specific multi-threaded server workloads that are not represented in the benchmark suite. The Opteron also has a listed launch MSRP of $639, which is the only price data available for either part.

For mobile or general-purpose computing, the Intel Core i7-3840QM is the clear winner. It is faster, more power-efficient, includes integrated graphics, and uses a more advanced 22 nm process. For server deployments that require ECC memory and a server-grade socket, the AMD Opteron 6274 remains relevant despite its benchmark deficit. The benchmark results show a near-tie in overall performance, but the feature sets diverge so sharply that the correct choice depends entirely on the use case. If the workload is rendering or general computation, pick Intel. If the workload demands error-correcting memory and a server platform, pick AMD. The data does not support a single best answer for all scenarios.