CPU Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually consistent picture: the Intel Core i7-9850HL wins all six Cinebench comparisons against the AMD Opteron 6348, though by margins so narrow they border on statistical noise. The largest advantage appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where Intel scores 95 against AMD’s 94, a 1.1% delta. Every other test shows a delta between 0.5% and 0.6%, making this one of the closest head-to-head matchups in the database.

In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel part leads Cinebench R15 with 676 points versus 672 for the Opteron, a 0.6% margin. The R20 multi-core test repeats the pattern: Intel scores 2819, AMD scores 2802, again a 0.6% difference. The R23 multi-core result shows Intel at 6712 and AMD at 6672, maintaining the same 0.6% edge. Single-core results follow suit across all three Cinebench versions, R15 shows 95 versus 94, R20 shows 397 versus 395, and R23 shows 947 versus 942.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this near-parity. The Intel i7-9850HL posts an average score of 1941 across all benchmarks, while the Opteron 6348 averages 1930. That 11-point gap places the Intel chip at the 44th percentile among all CPUs, one percentile point ahead of the Opteron's 43rd percentile ranking.

Context from nearest rivals shows how tight this field is. The i7-9850HL sits within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-7820HQ, the Intel Xeon E3-1535M v5, the Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5, and the Intel Core i5-1035G7. The Opteron 6348 matches the Intel Core i7-1180G7 exactly at 1930, sits 0.2% behind the Intel Core i3-10300, and leads the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 and Intel Core i3-10305T by 0.3% and 0.4% respectively. Neither chip can claim meaningful separation from its immediate competitors.

What the numbers reveal is a fundamental performance equivalence despite radically different hardware approaches. The Intel part achieves these scores with 6 cores and 12 threads; the AMD chip uses 12 cores with 12 threads. The fact that these two designs land within 0.6% of each other across every test suggests that architectural efficiency fully compensates for the Opteron's core-count advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in this comparison?

A: The Intel Core i7-9850HL wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with the largest margin being 1.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core and the smallest being 0.5% in both R20 single-core and R23 single-core.

Q: How close are the average benchmark scores between these two CPUs?

A: The Intel i7-9850HL averages 1941 points, while the AMD Opteron 6348 averages 1930 points. The 11-point difference places Intel at the 44th percentile and AMD at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: What is the single biggest performance gap in either direction?

A: The largest delta in the entire comparison is 1.1%, achieved by the Intel i7-9850HL in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 95 versus the Opteron's 94.

Q: Does the Opteron 6348 win any benchmark category?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the AMD Opteron 6348 with zero wins across all six benchmark tests, though its scores trail by only 0.5% to 1.1% in every case.

Q: How does the Opteron 6348 compare to its own nearest rivals?

A: The Opteron 6348 matches the Intel Core i7-1180G7 exactly with an average score of 1930, trails the Intel Core i3-10300 by 0.2%, leads the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 by 0.3%, and leads the Intel Core i3-10305T by 0.4%.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: No. Both the Intel Core i7-9850HL and the AMD Opteron 6348 are designated as end-of-life products in their production status fields.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-9850HL wins every measured benchmark category, but the margins are so small that the practical distinction matters more for workload characteristics than for raw scores. In single-threaded performance, the Intel chip holds a consistent edge, 1.1% in R15, 0.5% in R20, and 0.5% in R23. These are the largest and most consistent deltas in the comparison, suggesting the Intel architecture handles lightly threaded workloads slightly better.

For multi-threaded tasks, the Intel part also leads, but by the uniform margin of 0.6% across R15, R20, and R23. This is notable because the Opteron 6348 fields twice as many physical cores (12 versus 6). The Intel i7-9850HL compensates with simultaneous multi-threading, giving it 12 logical threads to match the Opteron's 12 physical threads, and still comes out ahead in every multi-core test.

The AMD Opteron 6348's winning territory lies outside the Cinebench suite. Its quad-channel DDR3 memory bus delivers 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the Intel chip's dual-channel DDR4 at 42.7 GB/s, a 39.8% bandwidth advantage for the Opteron. For workloads that saturate memory bandwidth rather than compute throughput, the Opteron's architecture could prove more capable. Additionally, the Opteron supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel part, making it the appropriate choice for memory-critical server environments where error correction is non-negotiable.

The Opteron also demonstrates its server pedigree through its socket and market positioning. The AMD Socket G34 platform and 115W TDP indicate a design for multi-socket server deployments where power efficiency is secondary to throughput and reliability. The Intel i7-9850HL, with its 25W TDP and mobile BGA 1440 socket, targets compact, power-constrained systems. For users prioritizing energy efficiency, the Intel chip consumes 90W less at maximum design power.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge sharply on almost every specification. The Intel Core i7-9850HL uses 6 cores with 12 threads, while the AMD Opteron 6348 provides 12 cores with 12 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: 1900 MHz for Intel versus 2800 MHz for AMD. Boost clocks show Intel at 4100 MHz and AMD at 3400 MHz, giving Intel a 700 MHz advantage at peak frequency.

Thermal design power presents the starkest contrast: the Intel chip draws 25W, while the Opteron requires 115W. The memory systems are entirely different generations and configurations, Intel supports DDR4 through a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD supports DDR3 through a quad-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support exists only on the AMD side. PCIe generation differs as well: Intel provides Gen 3, AMD provides Gen 2.

The Intel part includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the Opteron has no integrated graphics. Socket compatibility is mutually exclusive: Intel BGA 1440 versus AMD Socket G34. The market segments reflect their intended uses: Mobile for Intel, Server/Workstation for AMD. The Opteron carries a launch MSRP of $575; the Intel part has no listed launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips spans generations and design philosophies. Intel's Coffee Lake-HR architecture, built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry, uses a monolithic die measuring 149 mm². AMD's Piledriver architecture, codenamed Abu Dhabi, uses a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries with a dual-die configuration totaling 2x 315 mm², or 630 mm² combined. The transistor counts reflect this divergence: the Opteron packs 2,400 million transistors, while the Intel chip's transistor count is not listed.

Cache hierarchies follow different design logics. The Intel i7-9850HL provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The Opteron 6348 offers 576 KB total L1 cache, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. The Intel design allocates cache per physical core, while the AMD design organizes cache around its module-based architecture, where pairs of cores share resources.

The Opteron's Piledriver architecture represents AMD's modular approach to server processors, with multiple dies connected on a single socket. The Intel Coffee Lake-HR design is a unified mobile processor with integrated graphics, reflecting Intel's strategy of consolidating CPU, GPU, and memory controller onto a single die. The release dates reinforce this generational gap, the Opteron launched in 2012, while the Intel part belongs to the later Coffee Lake generation.

Manufacturing differences are equally pronounced. The 14 nm Intel process allows higher clock speeds at dramatically lower power, explaining how the Intel chip reaches 4100 MHz boost within a 25W envelope. The 32 nm GlobalFoundries process forces the Opteron to use 115W to achieve a 3400 MHz boost clock. The Intel chip's smaller die and newer process enable features like Gen 3 PCIe and DDR4 support, while the Opteron's older design is limited to Gen 2 PCIe and DDR3.

The generation field identifies Intel as Core i7 (Coffee Lake-HR) and AMD as Opteron (Abu Dhabi), confirming that these processors come from different eras and market targets. The Intel part's integrated UHD Graphics 630 and mobile socket mark it as a solution for compact, power-sensitive devices. The Opteron's server socket, ECC support, and higher memory bandwidth position it for enterprise workloads where data integrity and throughput matter more than power efficiency. Despite these architectural chasms, the Cinebench results show both processors delivering nearly identical compute performance, a testament to how architectural efficiency can offset raw resource advantages.