AMD Opteron 6274 vs Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data presents an unusually clear picture: the AMD Opteron 6274 wins all six head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2. That does not mean the Xeon is without merits, but in the specific Cinebench workloads measured, the Opteron holds a consistent, if narrow, advantage. The wins are not concentrated in one test type; they appear across both single-core and multi-core runs, suggesting the AMD part's edge is structural rather than workload-specific.

Looking at the use-case split, the Opteron 6274 is the stronger choice for threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 483 versus the Xeon's 476, a 1.5% lead. In R20 multi-core, the gap is 2014 to 1987, a 1.4% margin. The R23 multi-core test shows 4796 against 4732, again a 1.4% difference. These are small margins, but they are consistent across three generations of the Cinebench benchmark.

The single-core results tell a similar story. The Opteron leads 68 to 67 in R15 single-core, 284 to 280 in R20 single-core, and 677 to 668 in R23 single-core. The percentage deltas range from 1.3% to 1.5%, always favoring the AMD chip. This is notable because single-core performance is often where Intel parts of this era excelled, yet the data here flips that expectation.

The Xeon E5-1410 v2 has no recorded wins in this comparison. That does not render it irrelevant. Its 80-watt TDP is significantly lower than the Opteron's 115 watts, which suggests it may be better suited for power-constrained environments. But in raw Cinebench output, the AMD processor is the winner across every measured test. The average benchmark score reflects this: the Opteron sits at 1387, the Xeon at 1368. Both processors land in the lower third of all CPUs in the database, with the Opteron at the 37th percentile and the Xeon at the 36th, so neither is a performance king by modern standards.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Opteron 6274 is built on the Bulldozer architecture, specifically the Interlagos variant, and belongs to the Opteron 6000 series. It uses a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a transistor count of 2,400 million spread across two dies, each measuring 315 mm². The Xeon E5-1410 v2, by contrast, is an Ivy Bridge-EN part from Intel, built on a 22 nm process with 1,860 million transistors on a single 257 mm² die.

The core configurations differ dramatically. The Opteron packs 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads. That four-to-one core ratio is the most obvious architectural split. The Opteron's cache hierarchy reflects its module-based Bulldozer design: 768 KB of shared L1, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Xeon uses a more conventional layout with 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 10 MB L3.

Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR3 and ECC memory, but the Opteron runs quad-channel with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the Xeon is triple-channel with 32.0 GB/s. That bandwidth difference is substantial and likely contributes to the Opteron's multi-core edge in rendering workloads that can utilize memory throughput.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Opteron uses Gen 2, while the Xeon supports Gen 3 with 24 lanes on the CPU only. The sockets are incompatible: the Opteron uses AMD Socket G34, the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1356. Neither processor has integrated graphics, and both are locked (multiplier not unlocked). The release dates are separated by about two years, with the Opteron launching in November 2011 and the Xeon in January 2014.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking aspect of the benchmark data is not the size of the wins but their uniformity. Every single test, from R15 to R23, from single-core to multi-core, shows the Opteron ahead by roughly 1.3% to 1.5%. This is a narrow margin, but it is a consistent one.

The largest relative lead is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Opteron's 483 beats the Xeon's 476 by 1.5%. The same test in single-core also shows a 1.5% gap, with 68 versus 67. In R20, the multi-core margin is 2014 versus 1987, a 1.4% difference, and the single-core run shows 284 versus 280, also 1.4%. The R23 results follow the pattern: multi-core is 4796 to 4732 for a 1.4% lead, and single-core is 677 to 668 for a 1.3% lead.

What does this mean in practical terms? A 1.5% difference in Cinebench R15 multi-core is barely perceptible in real-world rendering. However, the fact that the Opteron maintains this edge across all tests, including single-core where Intel architectures of this era often held advantages, is worth investigating. The Opteron's higher base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 3.10 GHz compare to the Xeon's 2.80 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. The Xeon has higher clocks, yet the Opteron still wins. That points to architectural efficiency or memory bandwidth playing a larger role than raw clock speed.

The Xeon's triple-channel memory bus delivers 32.0 GB/s, while the Opteron's quad-channel bus delivers 51.2 GB/s. In Cinebench workloads, which are heavily dependent on memory subsystem performance, that bandwidth advantage could explain the Opteron's consistent, if small, superiority. The Opteron also has far more physical cores, which helps in multi-threaded tests, but the single-core wins suggest something beyond core count.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the database?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests.

Q: How large is the performance gap between the two?

A: The margins are narrow, ranging from 1.3% to 1.5% across all tests. The largest delta is 1.5% in Cinebench R15 (both single and multi-core), while the smallest is 1.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Opteron 6274 and the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 support ECC memory, and both use DDR3.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Opteron 6274 uses a quad-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon E5-1410 v2 uses a triple-channel bus with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a lower power draw?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has a TDP of 80 watts, while the AMD Opteron 6274 has a TDP of 115 watts.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Opteron 6274 is built on a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 is built on a 22 nm process from Intel.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for rendering workloads: the AMD Opteron 6274 is the stronger performer in the Cinebench suite, winning every measured test by a small but consistent margin. Its 16 cores and 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth give it an edge in multi-threaded rendering, while its single-core results are surprisingly competitive against a newer Intel part with higher clock speeds.

The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 is not without rationale for selection. Its 80-watt TDP is 30% lower than the Opteron's 115 watts, which could matter in dense server deployments or systems where cooling and power budgets are tight. The Xeon also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 24 lanes on the CPU, whereas the Opteron is limited to Gen 2. For workloads that are PCIe bandwidth-sensitive, the Xeon could be the better fit.

However, for raw CPU compute in Cinebench, the Opteron is the winner. The average benchmark score of 1387 versus 1368 reflects this, and the percentile ranking of 37 versus 36 confirms that both sit at similar levels relative to the broader CPU landscape. Neither processor is a modern powerhouse, but between the two, the Opteron 6274 produces higher scores across every recorded test.

The choice ultimately depends on priorities. If absolute rendering performance and memory bandwidth are the primary concerns, the Opteron 6274 is the data-backed pick. If lower power consumption and newer PCIe support matter more, the Xeon E5-1410 v2 has clear advantages. For users who only care about Cinebench scores, the answer is unambiguous: the Opteron wins all six tests.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | AMD Opteron 6274 | Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 |

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

| Series | Opteron 6000 series | Not specified |

| Cores | 16 | 4 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.10 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 115 watts | 80 watts |

| Socket | AMD Socket G34 | Intel Socket 1356 |

| Architecture | Bulldozer | Ivy Bridge |

| Codename | Interlagos | Ivy Bridge-EN |

| Generation | Opteron (Interlagos) | Xeon E5 (Ivy Bridge-EN) |

| Process node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 1,860 million |

| Die size | 2x 315 mm² | 257 mm² |

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

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

| L3 cache | 8 MB (per die) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Quad-channel | Triple-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 32.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 24 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release date | 2011-11-13 | 2014-01-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $639 | Not specified |

| Part number | OS6274WKTGGGU | SR1B0 |

| Average benchmark score | 1387 | 1368 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 37 | 36 |