CPU Comparison

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 6328 wins every single head-to-head Cinebench comparison against the Intel Celeron G6900E. The Opteron leads by margins ranging from 19.4% to 20.3% across all six tests, with the Celeron failing to secure a single victory. This complete sweep is notable given the architectural gap, but the Opteron's eight cores and higher clock speeds prove decisive in every workload measured.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single-core advantage for the AMD Opteron 6328 appears in Cinebench R15, where it scores 64 against the Celeron's 51, a delta of -20.3% from the Celeron's perspective. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 single-core with a 267 to 215 result (-19.5%), and Cinebench R23 single-core with 636 to 512 (-19.5%). The consistency of these margins, all hovering near 20%, suggests the Opteron's 3.80 GHz boost clock provides a sustained per-thread advantage over the Celeron's fixed 3.00 GHz base clock.

Multi-core results tell the same story with slightly smaller gaps. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows the Opteron at 454 versus 366 (-19.4%), while Cinebench R20 multi-core yields 1894 against 1525 (-19.5%). The Cinebench R23 multi-core test, often considered the most demanding, gives the Opteron 4510 versus the Celeron's 3632, again a -19.5% delta. The fact that the multi-core margins nearly match the single-core margins indicates the Opteron's eight cores scale efficiently without major contention losses, despite its older Piledriver architecture.

Notably absent from the Opteron's benchmark suite is Geekbench. The Celeron has Geekbench scores of 2702 multi-core and 1561 single-core, but no comparable Geekbench data exists for the Opteron, so those results cannot be used for direct comparison. Within the six tests that do match, the Opteron's smallest win is 19.4% and its largest is 20.3%, showing remarkable uniformity. The Celeron's average benchmark score sits at 1321, while the Opteron's is 1304, a 1.3% difference that actually favors the Celeron, but this average includes the Geekbench results that only the Celeron has, skewing the aggregate metric.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the head-to-head data, the AMD Opteron 6328 wins every workload category measured. It dominates both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench tests, making it the superior choice for any application that relies on CPU rendering, 3D modeling, or video encoding, tasks that Cinebench directly simulates. The Opteron's 8 cores and 8 threads provide the parallel throughput needed for such workloads, and its 3.80 GHz boost clock ensures competitive per-core performance when only a few threads are active.

The Intel Celeron G6900E does not win any benchmark in the provided dataset. However, its Geekbench scores, 2702 multi-core and 1561 single-core, do exist and can be referenced for context, though no Opteron comparison is available. The Celeron's 2 cores and 2 threads, combined with its 3.00 GHz clock, place it firmly in entry-level territory. It also features UHD Graphics 710 integrated graphics, which the Opteron lacks entirely, so systems built around the Celeron can operate without a discrete GPU, a practical advantage that no benchmark in this pack captures.

For users prioritizing raw compute in Cinebench-type workloads, the Opteron is the clear winner. For those needing a complete, low-power desktop solution with integrated graphics, the Celeron offers capabilities the Opteron cannot match, even if it loses every computational test. The Opteron's quad-channel memory bus and ECC support further position it for server environments, while the Celeron's DDR4/DDR5 support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity target modern desktop builds.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The Intel Celeron G6900E uses Alder Lake-S architecture on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, while the AMD Opteron 6328 uses Piledriver architecture on a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries. This process gap, 10 nm versus 32 nm, explains the Celeron's dramatically lower 46 W TDP against the Opteron's 115 W, despite the Opteron's higher performance.

Core counts differ substantially: the Celeron has 2 cores and 2 threads, while the Opteron has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Opteron's cache hierarchy is larger overall, 384 KB L1, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die, compared to the Celeron's 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. The Opteron also integrates 2,400 million transistors across two 315 mm² dies, whereas the Celeron's transistor count and die size are not listed.

Memory and I/O capabilities diverge sharply. The Celeron supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while the Opteron uses DDR3 in quad-channel mode with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Opteron, and PCIe generations differ: Gen 5 for the Celeron versus Gen 2 for the Opteron. The Celeron includes integrated UHD Graphics 710; the Opteron has none. Sockets are incompatible, Intel Socket 1700 versus AMD Socket G34, ensuring no platform cross-compatibility.

Release dates underline the generational gap: the Celeron launched on 2022-01-03, while the Opteron dates to 2012-11-04, nearly a decade earlier. Production status reflects this, with the Celeron listed as Active and the Opteron as End-of-life. The Opteron's part number, OS6328WKT8GHK, is specified, while the Celeron's is not.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The AMD Opteron 6328 wins every single-core Cinebench test. In R15, it scores 64 versus 51 (-20.3%); in R20, 267 versus 215 (-19.5%); and in R23, 636 versus 512 (-19.5%).

Q: Does the Intel Celeron G6900E win any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Opteron winning all six Cinebench tests. The Celeron has Geekbench scores (2702 multi, 1561 single), but the Opteron has no Geekbench results for comparison.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two?

A: The Celeron has a 46 W TDP, while the Opteron consumes 115 W. This makes the Celeron far more power-efficient, likely due to its 10 nm process versus the Opteron's 32 nm process.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Celeron supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel, while the Opteron uses DDR3 in quad-channel with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron also supports ECC memory; the Celeron does not.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Celeron G6900E includes integrated UHD Graphics 710. The AMD Opteron 6328 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Celeron's average benchmark score is 1321, while the Opteron's is 1304. Despite losing every head-to-head test, the Celeron's average is slightly higher due to its Geekbench results being included in the average.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Celeron G6900E | AMD Opteron 6328 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 8 |

| Threads | 2 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 46 W | 115 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket G34 |

| Architecture | Alder Lake | Piledriver |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | Not listed | 2,400 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 2x 315 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 384 KB |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per module) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | 8 MB (per die) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5 | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2012-11-04 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $575 |

The Verdict

The data directs a straightforward choice depending on workload. For compute-heavy tasks measured by Cinebench, rendering, simulation, or content creation, the AMD Opteron 6328 is unequivocally superior, winning every test by roughly 20%. Its eight cores, 3.80 GHz boost clock, and larger cache hierarchy deliver consistent advantages that the Celeron cannot overcome. The Opteron's quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support also make it suitable for server or workstation environments where reliability and memory throughput matter.

The Intel Celeron G6900E, despite losing all six benchmark comparisons, offers distinct advantages for other use cases. Its 46 W TDP versus 115 W makes it dramatically more power-efficient, a critical factor for always-on or compact systems. Integrated UHD Graphics 710 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU, and support for DDR4/DDR5 with PCIe Gen 5 provides a modern foundation for desktop builds. Its Active production status ensures ongoing availability, while the Opteron is End-of-life.

Neither processor holds a universal advantage. The Opteron wins every measured performance metric, but the Celeron wins on efficiency, platform modernity, and integrated features. Users who prioritize raw compute and have a discrete GPU should choose the Opteron. Users who value low power consumption, current platform support, and integrated graphics should choose the Celeron, accepting its lower performance. The Opteron's launch MSRP was $575, though no price data exists for the Celeron, and both chips sit near the 35th percentile of all CPUs, indicating neither is a performance leader in the broader market.