AMD Opteron 6328 vs Intel Core i7-3615QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3615QM and AMD Opteron 6328 represent two very different approaches to computing from the same era, one aimed at high-end mobile workstations and the other at dense server deployments. The data shows a consistent, though narrow, victory for the AMD part across every recorded benchmark, with the Opteron taking all six head-to-head tests by margins of roughly 2.5% to 3.1%. Despite the Opteron’s clean sweep, the two processors land in nearly the same performance tier, with the Intel chip at the 34th percentile of all CPUs and the AMD chip at the 35th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6328 wins every single benchmark category recorded in the database. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 454 against the Core i7-3615QM’s 442, a 2.6% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a 3.1% advantage, with 64 points versus 62. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the Opteron leads 1894 to 1845 in multicore and 267 to 260 in single-core, both 2.6% gaps. In Cinebench R23, the Opteron again holds a 2.6% multicore lead (4510 versus 4393) and a 2.5% single-core lead (636 versus 620). The Opteron also posts a higher average benchmark score of 1304 compared to the Intel part’s 1260.

There is no benchmark category where the Intel Core i7-3615QM comes out ahead. However, the Intel chip’s wins are contextual rather than numeric. It is a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP, while the Opteron is a server part with a 115 W TDP. The Intel chip includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4000), whereas the Opteron has none. For a laptop or all-in-one system, the Intel part is the only viable choice despite losing every benchmark, because the Opteron cannot be deployed in that form factor at all. The Opteron’s wins are all in raw compute, but the Intel chip wins in platform flexibility.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark. The Intel Core i7-3615QM is built on Intel’s 22 nm Ivy Bridge process with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. It uses four physical cores with Hyper-Threading, giving eight threads. Cache is organized per core: 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a shared 6 MB L3. The memory bus is dual-channel, and ECC memory is not supported. The chip comes with Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics, making it a self-contained mobile package. Its socket is Intel BGA 1224, which is soldered rather than socketed, meaning it is not upgradeable in a traditional sense.

The AMD Opteron 6328 is built on GlobalFoundries’ 32 nm Piledriver process, using 2,400 million transistors across two 315 mm² dies. It has eight cores and eight threads, with no SMT equivalent. The cache layout is module-based: 384 KB of L1 total, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. Memory support is DDR3 over a quad-channel bus with a rated 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported. It uses AMD Socket G34 and is a server-class part. The Opteron’s PCIe is Gen 2, while the Intel chip’s PCIe information is not recorded in the database.

The process node difference matters. Intel’s 22 nm process is denser and more power-efficient than AMD’s 32 nm, which helps explain how the Core i7-3615QM delivers comparable performance at 45 W versus the Opteron’s 115 W. The Opteron compensates with higher clock speeds: 3.20 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost against the Intel chip’s 2.30 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. The Opteron also has more physical cores, but the Intel chip’s Hyper-Threading closes the thread count gap to a tie at eight threads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Opteron 6328 wins every multicore test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 4510 versus 4393 for the Intel Core i7-3615QM, a 2.6% lead. The R15 and R20 multicore tests show the same 2.6% margin.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-3615QM better for single-core performance?

A: No. The Opteron also wins every single-core test. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Opteron scores 64 against 62, a 3.1% lead. In R20 and R23 single-core, the Opteron leads by 2.6% and 2.5% respectively.

Q: Can the AMD Opteron 6328 be used in a laptop?

A: No. The Opteron uses AMD Socket G34, a server socket, and has no integrated graphics. It is classified as a server/workstation part with a 115 W TDP. The Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1224 and includes Intel HD 4000 graphics, making it the only one of the two designed for mobile systems.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Opteron 6328 supports ECC memory and uses a quad-channel DDR3 interface with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-3615QM does not support ECC and uses a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Opteron has an average benchmark score of 1304, placing it at the 35th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel chip averages 1260, at the 34th percentile. The Opteron’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-6400 at 1307, while the Intel chip’s nearest rival is the AMD Athlon 200GE at 1261.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Opteron has eight physical cores, while the Intel chip has four physical cores with Hyper-Threading for eight threads. Both processors present eight threads to the operating system, but the Opteron does so with native cores and the Intel part with SMT.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3615QM | AMD Opteron 6328 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 115 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | AMD Socket G34 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Piledriver |

| Codename | Ivy Bridge | Abu Dhabi |

| Process node | 22 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

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

| Die size | 160 mm² | 2x 315 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 384 KB |

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

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (per die) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 4000 | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2012-04-28 | 2012-11-04 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $575 |

| Part number | SR0MP | OS6328WKT8GHK |

The specification table shows the fundamental difference in design philosophy. The Intel chip is a compact, power-efficient mobile processor with a dense 22 nm process and integrated graphics. The Opteron is a dual-die server processor with more cores, higher clocks, ECC support, and quad-channel memory, but it consumes more than twice the power.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. Across all six recorded tests, the AMD Opteron 6328 wins by a narrow but uniform margin. The smallest gap is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Opteron leads by 2.5% (636 versus 620). The largest gap is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Opteron leads by 3.1% (64 versus 62).

The multicore tests tell a similar story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Opteron scores 454 against 442, a 2.6% lead. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it is 1894 against 1845, again 2.6%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Opteron scores 4510 against 4393, a 2.6% lead. The R20 single-core test also shows a 2.6% gap, with 267 versus 260.

These margins are small. A 2.6% difference in Cinebench scores is within run-to-run variance for many systems, and the Opteron’s average benchmark score of 1304 is only 3.5% higher than the Intel chip’s 1260. The percentile rankings reinforce this: 35th percentile for the Opteron versus 34th for the Intel part. The Opteron wins every test, but it does not dominate. The consistent margin across both single-core and multicore workloads suggests the Opteron’s higher clock speeds (3.20 GHz base, 3.80 GHz boost) give it a small edge over the Intel chip’s Ivy Bridge architecture, which is held back by its lower 2.30 GHz base clock.

The Intel chip’s nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Athlon 200GE with an average score of 1261, the Intel Core i3-7100T at 1258, the Intel Xeon W-2102 at 1264, and the Intel Core i3-1005G1 at 1265. The Opteron’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-6400 at 1307, the Intel Core i7-3610QE at 1297, the AMD Athlon Gold 7220U at 1311, and the Intel Core i7-3770T at 1314. This places both chips in the same performance neighborhood, roughly equivalent to a mid-range desktop processor from a few years later.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but conditional recommendation. If the workload is server-side compute and the platform can accommodate a 115 W Socket G34 processor with quad-channel DDR3 and ECC memory, the AMD Opteron 6328 is the better performer. It wins all six recorded benchmarks, offers eight native cores, supports ECC memory, and has a higher average benchmark score of 1304. Its launch MSRP was $575, and it is now end-of-life.

If the requirement is a mobile system, the Intel Core i7-3615QM is the only choice between these two. The Opteron cannot be used in a laptop: it has no integrated graphics, uses a server socket, and consumes 115 W. The Intel chip fits Intel BGA 1224, includes Intel HD 4000 graphics, and runs at 45 W. It loses every benchmark by roughly 2.5% to 3.1%, but it is the only one of the two that can power a portable workstation.

For a builder choosing between these two specific processors, the decision is dictated by platform, not performance. The Opteron is faster in every measured test, but the Intel chip is a mobile part with integrated graphics and a much lower power envelope. The performance gap is small enough that it should not be the deciding factor. The socket, power budget, and memory requirements will determine which processor can even be installed. The Opteron wins on raw compute, the Intel chip wins on mobility and efficiency.