CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably close contest between the AMD Opteron 6281 and the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3. Across all six Cinebench tests, the AMD part wins every single matchup, but the margins are consistently narrow. The largest advantage appears in the multicore tests, where the Opteron 6281 leads by 0.7% in both Cinebench R20 (2598 vs 2580) and Cinebench R23 (6187 vs 6144). The R15 multicore test shows a 0.6% edge for AMD (623 vs 619), while the single-core tests are even tighter: R15 single-core is a dead heat at 87 points for both, and the R20 single-core test sees AMD ahead by just 0.5% (366 vs 364).

The overall pattern is one of near-parity with a slight AMD tilt. The average benchmark score for the Opteron 6281 is 1789, while the Xeon E5-4610 v3 sits at 1777, a difference of only 0.7%. This places the AMD chip at the 42nd percentile of all CPUs, with the Intel part one percentile behind at 41. The nearest rival data reinforces how close these two processors are: the Opteron 6281's closest competitors include the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 itself (deltaPct 0.7%) and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE (deltaPct 0.1%), while the Xeon's rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 (deltaPct -0.1%) and the Intel Core i7-4870HQ (deltaPct 0.4%).

What stands out is that the AMD chip wins despite having a different core/thread configuration. The Opteron 6281 offers 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-4610 v3 provides 10 cores and 20 threads. The data shows that the AMD's extra physical cores translate into a marginal multicore advantage, but the Intel's Hyper-Threading capability (implied by the 10-core/20-thread split) keeps it competitive. The single-core tests are essentially a wash, both chips score 87 in R15 single-core, and the R20 and R23 differences are under a point. This suggests that per-thread performance is nearly identical, which is notable given the architectural differences between Bulldozer and Haswell.

Where Each One Wins

The Opteron 6281 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, so the division of strengths is clear. The AMD part's biggest victories come in multicore workloads: the 0.7% leads in Cinebench R20 and R23 multicore tests indicate that the 16-core design handles heavily threaded rendering workloads slightly better than the Xeon's 10 cores with 20 threads. The R15 multicore test shows a 0.6% advantage, reinforcing this pattern. For users running CPU-bound rendering, video encoding, or scientific simulations that scale across many threads, the data points to the Opteron 6281 as the marginally stronger choice.

However, the Xeon E5-4610 v3 is not without its merits. While it loses every benchmark, the margins are so small that the practical difference is negligible. In single-core performance, the two chips are functionally identical, the R15 single-core score is 87 for both, and the R20 difference is just 2 points (366 vs 364). This means that for lightly threaded workloads like legacy applications, database transactions, or single-threaded scripting, the Xeon matches the Opteron's performance despite having fewer physical cores. The Xeon's 20 threads versus the Opteron's 16 also suggests better handling of workloads that benefit from simultaneous multithreading, even if the benchmark data does not show a clear win there. For a user already invested in the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform, the Xeon offers competitive performance with lower power consumption (105W TDP vs 130W TDP), which could translate to lower operating costs in dense server deployments.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multicore score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Opteron 6281 scores 6187 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 scores 6144. The AMD part leads by 0.7%.

Q: Are the single-core scores different between the two CPUs?

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, both processors score exactly 87 points. In R20 single-core, the Opteron 6281 scores 366 versus 364 for the Xeon, a 0.5% difference. In R23 single-core, the Opteron scores 873 versus 867, a 0.7% difference.

Q: How do these processors compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: The Opteron 6281 has an average benchmark score of 1789, placing it at the 42nd percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon E5-4610 v3 has an average score of 1777, placing it at the 41st percentile. The Opteron's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE with a deltaPct of 0.1%, while the Xeon's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 with a deltaPct of -0.1%.

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

A: The AMD Opteron 6281 has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 supports DDR4 memory. The AMD Opteron 6281 supports DDR3 memory. Both have quad-channel memory buses with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Opteron 6281 has a TDP of 130W, while the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 has a TDP of 105W. The Intel part consumes 25W less power.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Opteron 6281 has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 has 10 cores and 20 threads. The base clock speeds are listed as 2.50 GHz for the AMD and 1700.00 MHz for the Intel (which appears to be a data artifact; the Xeon's boost clock is listed as null). The AMD has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, while the Intel's boost clock is not provided. TDP differs significantly: 130W for the AMD versus 105W for the Intel.

The sockets are incompatible: the Opteron 6281 uses AMD Socket G34, and the Xeon E5-4610 v3 uses Intel Socket 2011-3. Process nodes differ as well, the AMD is built on a 32 nm process by GlobalFoundries, while the Intel uses a 22 nm process from Intel. Transistor counts are close: 2,400 million for the AMD versus 2,600 million for the Intel. Die size varies, with the AMD using a dual-die design (2x 315 mm²) versus a single 356 mm² die for the Intel. Cache configurations are fundamentally different: the AMD has 768 KB L1, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die, while the Intel has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 25 MB shared L3.

Memory support also differs: the AMD uses DDR3, and the Intel uses DDR4. PCIe support varies, with the AMD offering Gen 2 and the Intel offering Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only). The launch MSRP for the AMD Opteron 6281 was $988, and the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 launched at $1219. Release dates are separated by over three years: the Opteron was released on 2012-04-30, and the Xeon on 2015-05-31.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is substantial. The AMD Opteron 6281 is built on the Bulldozer architecture (codename Interlagos) from the Opteron 6000 series, while the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 uses the Haswell architecture (codename Haswell-EP) from the Xeon E5 family. The Bulldozer design uses a modular approach where pairs of cores share certain resources; the data shows 16 cores with 16 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Haswell design provides 10 cores with 20 threads, indicating Intel's Hyper-Threading technology is active. The cache hierarchy reflects this difference: AMD's L1 is 768 KB total, with L2 organized as 2 MB per module and L3 as 8 MB per die (two dies). Intel's cache is per-core for L1 (64 KB per core) and L2 (256 KB per core), with a shared 25 MB L3.

Manufacturing technology separates them further: AMD uses a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while Intel uses a 22 nm process. The transistor counts are comparable (2,400 million vs 2,600 million), but the die layout differs, AMD uses two 315 mm² dies, while Intel uses a single 356 mm² die. The memory interface is another differentiator: the AMD supports DDR3, while the Intel supports DDR4, both with quad-channel buses and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. The PCIe generation differs, with AMD at Gen 2 and Intel at Gen 3 with 40 lanes. Neither has integrated graphics. Both are end-of-life server/workstation parts, with the AMD released roughly three years earlier than the Intel.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear but narrow verdict. The AMD Opteron 6281 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 0% (R15 single-core tie) to 0.7% (R20 and R23 multicore). Its average benchmark score of 1789 exceeds the Xeon's 1777 by just 0.7%, and it holds a one-percentile advantage in the overall CPU ranking (42nd vs 41st). For users prioritizing raw benchmark performance, the Opteron 6281 is the statistical winner, even if the practical difference is minimal. The 16-core design appears to give it a slight edge in multicore workloads, and its single-core scores match or slightly exceed the Intel part despite the architectural differences.

The Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3, however, offers compelling reasons for selection. Its 20 threads versus the AMD's 16 could benefit workloads that leverage simultaneous multithreading, and its lower TDP (105W vs 130W) indicates better power efficiency. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3, which are newer standards than the AMD's DDR3 and PCIe Gen 2. For users building on the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform or requiring modern memory and I/O features, the Xeon's benchmark deficit of under 1% is a reasonable trade-off. The data does not show a significant performance gap in any test, so platform familiarity, memory preferences, or power constraints could legitimately tip the decision toward Intel. For pure Cinebench performance, choose the AMD Opteron 6281; for platform features and efficiency, the Intel Xeon E5-4610 v3 is the data-supported alternative.