CPU Comparison

Intel Core i3-8100T and AMD Opteron 6344 are two end-of-life processors from different eras and market segments, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.6% of each other. The Intel chip is a 4-core, 4-thread desktop part built on a 14 nm process, while the AMD is a 12-core, 12-thread server/workstation chip on a 32 nm node. Despite the Opteron’s higher core count, the benchmark data shows it winning every head-to-head test, though the Intel part counters with lower power draw and newer platform features.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6344 wins every single benchmark comparison in the data set, taking all six head-to-head tests across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core workloads. In multi-core tests, the Opteron’s 12 physical cores provide a decisive advantage, with scores of 519, 2166, and 5158 in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 respectively. The Intel Core i3-8100T trails consistently, posting 450, 1876, and 4467 in the same tests, which translates to a 13.3% to 13.4% deficit across all multi-core runs.

Surprisingly, the Opteron also wins single-core tests despite its lower 2.60 GHz base clock and older Piledriver architecture. The AMD part scores 73, 305, and 728 in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, while the Intel chip manages only 63, 264, and 630, giving the Opteron a 13.5% to 13.7% edge. This is notable because the i3-8100T has a higher base clock of 3.10 GHz and a much newer Coffee Lake architecture, yet the data shows the AMD part’s 3.20 GHz boost clock and architecture still outperforms it in these tests.

Where the Intel part wins is in platform efficiency and integrated features. It has a 35 W TDP compared to the Opteron’s 115 W, making it far more suitable for compact or low-power builds. The i3-8100T also includes UHD Graphics 630 integrated graphics, while the Opteron has none. The Intel chip uses DDR4 memory with dual-channel support, whereas the Opteron uses DDR3 with quad-channel support. For users who need a complete system without a discrete GPU, the Intel part has a clear advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i3-8100T uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process with a die size of 126 mm², produced by Intel. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no hyper-threading, running at a fixed 3.10 GHz with no boost clock. Its cache hierarchy is per-core: 64 KB L1, 256 KB L2, and a shared 6 MB L3 cache. The chip supports DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, and it uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It has a launch MSRP of $117.

The AMD Opteron 6344 belongs to the Opteron 6000 series and uses the Piledriver architecture under the Abu Dhabi codename. It is built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 2x 315 mm² and 2,400 million transistors. The chip packs 12 cores and 12 threads, running at a 2.60 GHz base clock with a 3.20 GHz boost clock. Its cache configuration differs significantly: 576 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. Memory support is DDR3 over a quad-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, which is substantially higher than the Intel part’s bandwidth. PCIe support is Gen 2, older than the Intel’s Gen 3. Its launch MSRP was $415.

These architectural differences explain the benchmark results. The Opteron’s 12 cores deliver more parallel throughput, while its boost clock of 3.20 GHz exceeds the Intel’s fixed 3.10 GHz, helping in single-threaded tests. The Intel chip’s advantage lies in its modern 14 nm process, which allows the 35 W TDP, and its integrated graphics, which the server-oriented Opteron lacks. The Opteron’s quad-channel memory interface provides 55.6% more theoretical bandwidth than the i3-8100T’s dual-channel setup.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 6344 wins all six comparisons, with deltas ranging from 13.3% to 13.7%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 519 against the Intel’s 450, a 13.3% advantage. Single-core R15 shows 73 versus 63, a 13.7% gap. The pattern holds across newer benchmarks: R20 multi-core gives 2166 versus 1876 (13.4% ahead), and R20 single-core gives 305 versus 264 (also 13.4%). R23 multi-core shows 5158 versus 4467 (13.4%), while R23 single-core shows 728 versus 630 (13.5%).

These consistent deltas suggest the Opteron’s advantage is architectural rather than workload-specific. The 13.4% margin in multi-core tests is smaller than the 3x core-count difference would suggest, indicating that the Intel’s newer architecture and higher base clock close much of the gap. The single-core results are more surprising: the Opteron’s 13.7% lead in R15 single-core and 13.5% in R23 single-core indicate that its boost clock of 3.20 GHz, combined with Piledriver’s design, outperforms the i3-8100T’s fixed 3.10 GHz in these specific workloads.

The average benchmark scores from the nearestRivals data confirm the close overall standing. The i3-8100T has an average benchmark score of 1500, while the Opteron sits at 1492, a difference of 0.5% in the Intel’s favor according to its rivals list. The Opteron’s rivals list shows the same comparison with a delta of -0.5%, meaning the Intel part is marginally ahead on average. Both processors sit at the 38th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are mid-pack performers overall.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Opteron 6344 for raw compute performance. It wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with a consistent 13.3% to 13.7% margin across all Cinebench tests. Users who prioritize multi-threaded throughput in rendering or scientific workloads should choose the Opteron, as its 12 cores deliver 5158 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the Intel’s 4467. The Opteron also wins single-core tests, making it the better choice for tasks that rely on single-thread performance, despite its older architecture.

However, the Intel Core i3-8100T has its own compelling case. Its 35 W TDP is less than a third of the Opteron’s 115 W, making it suitable for systems where power consumption and cooling are primary concerns. The integrated UHD Graphics 630 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU, which is a significant feature for basic desktop use. The i3-8100T also supports newer DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3, offering a more modern platform foundation. Its launch MSRP of $117 is substantially lower than the Opteron’s $415, though pricing considerations are secondary to the performance data.

For a desktop user building a low-power, integrated system, the i3-8100T is the sensible pick. For a server or workstation workload where every bit of compute matters, the Opteron 6344 wins outright on performance. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, but the Opteron’s consistent benchmark victories make it the performance leader in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Opteron 6344 scores 5158 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core i3-8100T scores 4467, giving the Opteron a 13.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-8100T have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i3-8100T includes UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Opteron 6344 has no integrated graphics.

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

A: The Intel Core i3-8100T has a TDP of 35 W, while the AMD Opteron 6344 has a TDP of 115 W.

Q: Which processor supports quad-channel memory?

A: The AMD Opteron 6344 supports quad-channel DDR3 memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i3-8100T uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i3-8100T has an average benchmark score of 1500, and the AMD Opteron 6344 has an average of 1492, a difference of 0.5% in the Intel’s favor.

Q: Did the AMD Opteron win any single-core tests?

A: Yes, the AMD Opteron 6344 won all single-core tests, including Cinebench R15 single-core with 73 versus 63, and R23 single-core with 728 versus 630.