AMD Opteron 6282 SE vs Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 and the AMD Opteron 6282 SE are both end-of-life server and workstation processors, but they come from different eras and design philosophies. The Xeon is a 4-core, 8-thread Skylake part built on a 14 nm process, while the Opteron is a 16-core, 16-thread Bulldozer part on 32 nm. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench results, and the Xeon wins all of them, though by narrow margins. This analysis walks through those results, the architectural differences, and the specification gaps that explain the outcome.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, each with a multi-core and a single-core test. In every case, the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 posts the higher score. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Xeon scores 560 against the Opteron's 546, a 2.6% advantage. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Xeon scores 78 and the Opteron 77, a 1.3% difference. The remaining four tests all show a 2.5% lead for the Xeon: R20 multi-core (2336 vs 2279), R20 single-core (329 vs 321), R23 multi-core (5564 vs 5427), and R23 single-core (785 vs 766).

These margins are consistent across the board. The Opteron has four times the core count (16 vs 4) and a higher base clock (2.60 GHz vs 2.10 GHz) and boost clock (3.30 GHz vs 3.20 GHz), yet it still trails in multi-core workloads. That indicates a substantial per-core efficiency gap. The Xeon's single-core lead, though small, is also present in all three Cinebench versions. The data shows no test where the Opteron comes out ahead.

The average benchmark scores reflect the same pattern. The Xeon has an average score of 1609, while the Opteron sits at 1569. Both processors occupy the 39th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-10610U (average 1611, 0.1% higher), the Core i7-970 (1613, 0.2% higher), the Core i3-9100E (1605, 0.3% lower), and the Core i3-9100T (1620, 0.7% higher). The Opteron's nearest rivals are the Core i3-8300 (1564, 0.3% lower), the Core i5-6600T (1563, 0.4% lower), the Ryzen 3 1300X (1562, 0.5% lower), and the Opteron 6276 (1560, 0.6% lower). These comparisons place both chips in a similar performance tier, but the Xeon consistently edges ahead in the recorded tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 6282 SE has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Xeon has a TDP of 25 W, while the Opteron has a TDP of 140 W.

Q: Which supports higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Opteron supports quad-channel DDR3 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the Xeon supports dual-channel DDR3 and DDR4 with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Xeon is built on a 14 nm process, while the Opteron uses a 32 nm process.

Q: Which processor wins in the recorded Cinebench tests?

A: The Xeon wins all six head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 1.3% to 2.6%.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different architectures. The Xeon uses the Skylake microarchitecture, specifically the Skylake-DT variant, and is built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. It packs 1,750 million transistors into a die size of 122 mm². The Opteron uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, on a 32 nm process. It contains 2,400 million transistors spread across two dies, each measuring 315 mm², for a total die area of 2x 315 mm².

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Opteron has 768 KB of L1 cache total, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Opteron's L3 is per die, meaning each of the two dies has its own 8 MB slice. The Xeon's L3 is shared across all four cores.

Memory support also diverges. The Xeon supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Opteron supports only DDR3, but in a quad-channel configuration, yielding 51.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The Xeon's PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Opteron uses Gen 2. Neither processor has integrated graphics.

The release dates are far apart. The Opteron was released on 2011-11-13, while the Xeon came out on 2015-10-18. The Opteron's part number is OS6282YETGGGU, and the Xeon's is SR2LN. Both are server and workstation parts, and both have locked multipliers.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Opteron has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the Xeon and 2.60 GHz for the Opteron; boost clocks are 3.20 GHz and 3.30 GHz, respectively. TDP is 25 W for the Xeon and 140 W for the Opteron. The sockets are different: Intel Socket 1151 for the Xeon, AMD Socket G34 for the Opteron.

The process node is 14 nm for the Xeon and 32 nm for the Opteron. The Xeon's foundry is listed as Intel, while the Opteron's foundry is not specified. Transistor counts are 1,750 million for the Xeon and 2,400 million for the Opteron. Die size is 122 mm² for the Xeon and 2x 315 mm² for the Opteron.

Cache configurations differ: the Xeon has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3; the Opteron has 768 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. Memory support is DDR3 and DDR4 for the Xeon, DDR3 only for the Opteron. Memory bus is dual-channel for the Xeon, quad-channel for the Opteron. Memory bandwidth is 34.1 GB/s for the Xeon and 51.2 GB/s for the Opteron. PCIe is Gen 3 with 16 lanes for the Xeon, Gen 2 for the Opteron.

Release dates are 2015-10-18 for the Xeon and 2011-11-13 for the Opteron. Launch MSRP was $278 for the Xeon and $1019 for the Opteron. Part numbers are SR2LN and OS6282YETGGGU. Both are end-of-life, both have ECC support, and neither has integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

In the recorded Cinebench benchmarks, the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 wins all six head-to-head tests. The Opteron does not win a single test. The Xeon's advantages range from 1.3% in R15 single-core to 2.6% in R15 multi-core. The other four tests show a 2.5% lead for the Xeon.

The Opteron does have higher raw specifications in some areas: more cores, higher base and boost clocks, higher memory bandwidth, and a larger transistor count. However, these do not translate into higher Cinebench scores. The Xeon's smaller process node, newer architecture, and more efficient per-core design allow it to outperform the Opteron despite having only a quarter of the cores.

For workloads that are heavily dependent on the specific Cinebench tests recorded, the Xeon is the clear winner. The Opteron's higher memory bandwidth and core count might be relevant for other types of workloads, but the database does not include such tests. Based on the available data, the Xeon is the better performer in every measured category.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v5 is the superior processor in the recorded Cinebench tests. It wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with margins that, while modest, are consistent across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Opteron's 16 cores and higher memory bandwidth do not overcome the Xeon's architectural efficiency.

Users who prioritize the specific Cinebench performance captured in this database should choose the Xeon. It also offers a much lower TDP (25 W vs 140 W) and a smaller manufacturing process, which may be relevant for power and thermal considerations. The Opteron, with its higher core count and memory bandwidth, might be attractive for other server workloads, but the recorded data does not support that conclusion. Both processors are end-of-life, so availability and platform support are historical. For the benchmarks measured, the Xeon is the winner.