AMD Opteron 6282 SE vs Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 Comparison

The AMD Opteron 6282 SE and Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 are two server processors from different eras and design philosophies, yet their benchmark results place them in an unexpectedly tight contest. Despite the Opteron’s 16 cores versus the Xeon’s 4, and a four-year gap in release dates, the data shows the AMD part winning every single head-to-head test by a razor-thin margin, while the Intel part counters with dramatically lower power consumption and a more modern feature set. This is a comparison of two very different ways to reach nearly the same performance level.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking aspect of this comparison is not the magnitude of the wins, but their consistency. The AMD Opteron 6282 SE wins all six Cinebench tests, yet the largest margin of victory is a mere 1.3%. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Opteron scores 546 against the Xeon’s 542, a 0.7% lead. The single-core R15 result is slightly more pronounced: 77 versus 76, which translates to a 1.3% advantage for AMD. This pattern holds across newer workloads, with the R20 multi-core test showing 2279 for AMD and 2260 for Intel (0.8% delta), and R23 multi-core at 5427 versus 5383 (also 0.8%).

What makes these numbers fascinating is the architectural disparity behind them. The Opteron achieves these scores using 16 physical cores at a 2.60 GHz base clock, while the Xeon does the same work with just 4 cores and 8 threads at a 2.40 GHz base clock. The Xeon’s single-core scores of 319 in R20 and 760 in R23 are only 0.6% and 0.8% behind the Opteron respectively, despite the AMD part having a higher boost clock of 3.30 GHz compared to the Intel’s 3.40 GHz. This suggests the Skylake architecture is extracting far more instructions per clock from each individual core than the older Bulldozer design can manage.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative of near-parity. The Opteron’s average is 1569, placing it just 0.3% ahead of its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-8300, and 0.4% ahead of the Core i5-6600T. The Xeon’s average of 1557 puts it in a dead heat with the AMD FX-8350 (0% delta) and just 0.1% behind the Core i3-1115G4E. Both processors sit at the 39th percentile of all CPUs, meaning that despite their different core counts and power envelopes, they deliver statistically indistinguishable performance in these mixed workloads. The data implies that for Cinebench rendering tasks, the extra 12 cores of the Opteron are effectively canceled out by the Xeon’s superior per-core efficiency.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if counterintuitive, verdict: the AMD Opteron 6282 SE is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded, but only by a margin that would be imperceptible in real-world use. With a 0.7% lead in R15 multi-core and 0.8% in R23 multi-core, the Opteron is technically the performance winner. However, this victory comes at a massive cost in efficiency. The Opteron is rated at 140 W TDP, exactly four times the Xeon’s 35 W TDP, yet it only manages to outperform the Xeon by less than 1% in multi-threaded tasks and around 1% in single-threaded tasks.

For a system builder prioritizing raw benchmark leadership, the Opteron is the choice, but the margin is so slim that it borders on statistical noise. The Xeon, on the other hand, offers nearly identical performance while consuming a quarter of the power. The Xeon also brings a more modern platform with PCIe Gen 3 support versus the Opteron’s Gen 2, and support for both DDR3 and DDR4 memory compared to the Opteron’s DDR3-only limitation. The launch MSRP of the Opteron was $1019, while the Xeon launched at $377, though performance-per-dollar is not the focus here. The verdict is that the Opteron wins on pure score, but the Xeon wins on every other measurable attribute in the data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6282 SE wins in all six Cinebench tests, making it the nominal champion for multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its 16 cores and 16 threads provide a theoretical advantage in heavily parallelized applications, even if the benchmark data shows that advantage is not fully realized against the Xeon. The Opteron also wins the single-core tests, albeit by margins of 1.3% or less, which could be attributed to its higher base clock of 2.60 GHz versus the Xeon’s 2.40 GHz.

The Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 wins in efficiency and platform features. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for dense server deployments where heat and power are primary concerns. The integrated HD Graphics P530 is a significant differentiator, as the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The Xeon’s dual-channel memory bus with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth is lower than the Opteron’s quad-channel 51.2 GB/s, but the Xeon’s support for DDR4 memory offers a modern upgrade path. The Xeon also uses a smaller 122 mm² die on a 14 nm process, compared to the Opteron’s dual 315 mm² dies on 32 nm, indicating Intel’s design is far more compact and power-efficient.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Opteron 6282 SE has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Opteron 6282 SE in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Opteron scores 5427, while the Xeon scores 5383, giving the AMD part a 0.8% lead in that specific test.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two processors?

A: The AMD Opteron 6282 SE has a TDP of 140 W, while the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 features integrated graphics, specifically HD Graphics P530. The AMD Opteron 6282 SE does not have integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports more memory channels?

A: The AMD Opteron 6282 SE supports quad-channel memory, while the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 supports dual-channel memory.

Q: What is the benchmark percentile ranking for both CPUs?

A: Both processors are ranked at the 39th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they perform at a similar level overall.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is stark. The AMD Opteron 6282 SE uses the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, which was designed with a module-based approach where pairs of cores share certain resources. This is reflected in its cache layout: a 768 KB L1 cache, 2 MB L2 cache per module, and 8 MB L3 cache per die. The processor is built on a 32 nm process at AMD, with a massive 2,400 million transistors spread across two 315 mm² dies. It supports DDR3 memory over a quad-channel bus, providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and uses PCIe Gen 2.

The Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5, in contrast, uses the Skylake architecture, codenamed Skylake-DT. This is a monolithic design on Intel’s 14 nm process, with 1,750 million transistors on a single 122 mm² die. The cache hierarchy is per-core: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. It supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus, offering 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Xeon also includes integrated HD Graphics P530, a feature absent from the Opteron. These differences explain why the Xeon can match the Opteron’s performance with a fraction of the cores: each Skylake core is far more capable than each Bulldozer module.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification. The AMD Opteron 6282 SE has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Opteron’s base clock is 2.60 GHz with a boost of 3.30 GHz, while the Xeon runs at 2.40 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. TDP is a major differentiator: 140 W for AMD versus 35 W for Intel. The sockets are incompatible, with the Opteron using AMD Socket G34 and the Xeon using Intel Socket 1151.

The process nodes differ significantly: 32 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for Intel. The AMD part has a much larger transistor count at 2,400 million versus Intel’s 1,750 million, and a larger die size at 2x 315 mm² versus 122 mm². Memory support differs, with the Opteron limited to DDR3 and the Xeon supporting both DDR3 and DDR4. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 51.2 GB/s over Intel’s 34.1 GB/s. PCIe generation differs (Gen 2 for AMD, Gen 3 for Intel), and only the Intel part has integrated graphics. The release dates are also distinct: the Opteron launched in 2011, while the Xeon launched in 2015.