AMD Opteron 6348 vs Intel Core i7-4940MX Comparison

The Intel Core i7-4940MX and AMD Opteron 6348 are end-of-life processors from opposite ends of the computing spectrum. The Core i7-4940MX is a mobile extreme edition part built on Intel's Haswell architecture, launched on 2014-01-19. The Opteron 6348 is a server and workstation part built on AMD's Piledriver architecture, launched on 2012-11-04. The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive result: the Opteron 6348 wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 1930 against the Core i7's 1886. Both processors sit at the 43rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, placing them in the same overall performance tier despite the Opteron's consistent head-to-head wins.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unusually consistent. Across all six Cinebench tests, the AMD Opteron 6348 wins every comparison, and the margin is nearly identical in each case. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 672 against the Core i7's 580, a 13.7% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Opteron scores 94 against 81, a 13.8% advantage. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20: multi-core 2802 versus 2418, and single-core 395 versus 341, both at 13.7%. Cinebench R23 repeats the margin: multi-core 6672 versus 5759, and single-core 942 versus 813, again 13.7%.

The consistency of the delta is striking. The Opteron's advantage is essentially the same in single-core and multi-core workloads, which suggests the performance gap is not driven by core count alone. The Core i7-4940MX has a higher boost clock (4.00 GHz versus 3.40 GHz), a newer process node (22 nm versus 32 nm), and a smaller die (177 mm² versus 2x 315 mm²), yet it trails in every recorded test. The single-core results are particularly telling: the Core i7's 4.00 GHz boost clock does not translate into a win even when only one thread is active.

The average benchmark score reinforces the head-to-head result. The Opteron 6348 averages 1930, while the Core i7-4940MX averages 1886. The nearest rivals in the database confirm the positioning. The Core i7's closest competitors are the Intel Xeon D-1531 at 1885 (0.1% behind), the Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 at 1883 (0.2% behind), the Intel Xeon E3-1558L v5 at 1882 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Processor U300 at 1881 (0.3% behind). The Opteron's closest competitors are the Intel Core i7-1180G7 at 1930 (0% difference), the Intel Core i3-10300 at 1934 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 at 1925 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i3-10305T at 1922 (0.4% behind). Both processors sit in a dense performance cluster, but the Opteron sits at the higher end of that cluster.

Where Each One Wins

The win tally is one-sided: the AMD Opteron 6348 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, and the Intel Core i7-4940MX wins none. But the use-case split is more nuanced than the raw scores suggest.

The Opteron 6348 is built for throughput. Its 12 cores and 12 threads, combined with a 59.7 GB/s quad-channel memory bus and ECC support, make it a natural fit for server and workstation workloads where memory capacity and reliability matter. The Core i7-4940MX, with 4 cores and 8 threads, is a mobile part designed for a different class of workload. Its 25.6 GB/s dual-channel memory bus is less than half the Opteron's bandwidth, which directly impacts memory-intensive server tasks.

The Core i7-4940MX does have structural advantages that matter in its target segment. Its TDP is 57 watts versus 115 watts for the Opteron, making it far more power-efficient. It includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics, while the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all. The Core i7 also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, and uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the Opteron uses PCIe Gen 2. These features make the Core i7 a more self-contained mobile solution, requiring no discrete GPU and less cooling overhead.

For a mobile workstation or a compact system where power draw and integrated graphics are priorities, the Core i7-4940MX is the more practical part. For a server rack where core count, memory bandwidth, and ECC support dominate, the Opteron 6348 is the stronger performer. The benchmark data supports this split: the Opteron wins every recorded test, but the Core i7's feature set addresses a different set of priorities.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Opteron 6348 wins with a score of 6672 against the Intel Core i7-4940MX's 5759, a 13.7% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-4940MX have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel HD 4600. The AMD Opteron 6348 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Opteron 6348 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-4940MX does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Opteron 6348 has a quad-channel DDR3 memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7-4940MX has a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Opteron 6348 has 12 cores and 12 threads. The Core i7-4940MX has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the process nodes?

A: The Core i7-4940MX is built on a 22 nm process. The Opteron 6348 is built on a 32 nm process.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core i7-4940MX has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Opteron 6348 has 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 3.10 GHz for the Intel and 2.80 GHz for the AMD; boost clocks are 4.00 GHz and 3.40 GHz respectively. TDP is 57 watts for the Intel and 115 watts for the AMD.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The Intel uses dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The AMD uses quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Intel provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the AMD provides Gen 2.

The Intel part includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics; the AMD has none. The Intel has an unlocked multiplier; the AMD is locked. The Intel targets the mobile segment, while the AMD targets server and workstation. Release dates are 2014-01-19 for the Intel and 2012-11-04 for the AMD. The Intel's launch MSRP was $1096, and the AMD's was $575.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The Core i7-4940MX is built on Intel's Haswell architecture at a 22 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. The Opteron 6348 uses AMD's Piledriver architecture (codename Abu Dhabi) at a 32 nm node, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 1,400 million for the Intel and 2,400 million for the AMD. Die size is 177 mm² for the Intel and 2x 315 mm² for the AMD, reflecting the Opteron's dual-die design.

Cache layouts differ as well. The Intel has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD has 576 KB of L1 total, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Opteron's cache is organized around its module-based Piledriver design, while the Intel uses a more conventional per-core layout.

The socket and platform are entirely different: Intel Socket G3 for the Core i7, AMD Socket G34 for the Opteron. The Opteron's server heritage is visible in its ECC support, quad-channel memory, and higher TDP. The Core i7's mobile heritage is visible in its lower TDP, integrated graphics, and unlocked multiplier. These architectural choices explain the benchmark results: the Opteron's wider memory bus and higher core count give it an edge in the recorded Cinebench tests, while the Core i7's newer process node and higher clocks are not enough to close the gap in these specific workloads.