AMD Opteron 6348 vs Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Opteron 6348 across every Cinebench iteration in the comparison. This is not a marginal victory; the AMD part wins all six head-to-head matchups, with the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 posting zero wins. The margins are consistent, ranging from a 1.0% advantage in Cinebench R20 single-core to a 1.2% edge in several multi-core and single-core tests.

Looking at multi-core performance, which is the primary metric for server workloads, the Opteron 6348 leads by 1.2% in Cinebench R15 (672 vs. 664), by 1.2% in Cinebench R20 (2802 vs. 2769), and by 1.2% in Cinebench R23 (6672 vs. 6595). These are tight but repeatable differences. The single-core results follow the same pattern: a 1.1% lead in R15 (94 vs. 93), a 1.0% lead in R20 (395 vs. 391), and a 1.2% lead in R23 (942 vs. 931). The consistency of the delta across all three Cinebench generations suggests a fundamental performance parity, with the Opteron holding a slight but real edge.

When placed against the broader database, both processors sit at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs. The Opteron 6348 has an average benchmark score of 1930, while the Xeon E5-2620 v3 scores 1907. The nearest rivals for the Opteron include the Intel Core i7-1180G7 (matching 1930), the Intel Core i3-10300 (1934, a 0.2% deficit), and the Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3 (1925, a 0.3% advantage). For the Xeon, the nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4 (1908), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE (1910), and the Intel Core i3-9100F (1903). This places both chips in the same performance tier, with the Opteron's 1.2% margin being the deciding factor in direct competition.

Where Each One Wins

The Opteron 6348 wins every benchmark in this comparison, so the use-case split is straightforward. The AMD chip is the better choice for any workload that relies on Cinebench-style rendering, which exercises both multi-core throughput and single-thread responsiveness. The multi-core wins of 1.2% across R15, R20, and R23 indicate that the Opteron's 12 physical cores are being utilized slightly more effectively than the Xeon's 6 cores with hyper-threading. For single-core tasks, the Opteron also wins, albeit by a narrower 1.0% to 1.2% margin, which points to a small clock-speed or micro-architectural advantage in lightly threaded scenarios.

The Xeon E5-2620 v3 does not have a single winning benchmark in this dataset. However, its performance is close enough that in real-world mixed workloads, the difference would often be imperceptible. The data shows the Xeon trailing by only 1.0% to 1.2% in every test, which is within run-to-run variance for many applications. That said, based strictly on the recorded numbers, the Opteron is the superior part for both multi-core and single-core Cinebench workloads. There is no benchmark category where the Intel chip can claim a win.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The AMD Opteron 6348 uses the Piledriver architecture, specifically the Abu Dhabi core, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning no hyper-threading, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The die consists of two separate 315 mm² chips, totaling 2,400 million transistors. The cache hierarchy includes 576 KB of L1, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. It uses DDR3 memory in a quad-channel configuration, achieving a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, and supports PCIe Gen 2.

The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3, in contrast, uses the Haswell architecture with the Haswell-EP codename, built on a 22 nm process at Intel. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, enabling simultaneous multi-threading, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The single die is 356 mm² and contains 2,600 million transistors. The cache layout is different: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 15 MB L3. It supports DDR4 memory in a quad-channel setup, also achieving 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU.

The key differences are the core count (12 vs. 6), the process node (32 nm vs. 22 nm), and the memory type (DDR3 vs. DDR4). The Opteron uses twice as many physical cores but lacks threading, while the Xeon relies on hyper-threading to reach 12 threads. The AMD chip also has a higher base and boost clock, which explains its slight single-core lead. The Xeon's advantage lies in its newer process node and PCIe Gen 3 support, which the Opteron lacks. Both have the same memory bandwidth and ECC support, and neither has integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 6348 has 12 physical cores, while the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 has 6 physical cores. However, the Xeon supports hyper-threading, so both chips present 12 threads to the operating system.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: The Opteron 6348 leads in single-core tests. In Cinebench R15, it scores 94 versus 93 for the Xeon, a 1.1% lead. In R20, the margin is 1.0% (395 vs. 391), and in R23, it is 1.2% (942 vs. 931).

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Opteron 6348 and the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 have ECC memory support. Both also use a quad-channel memory bus, with the same recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 has 15 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Opteron 6348 has 8 MB of L3 per die. The Opteron's cache is split across two dies.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The AMD Opteron 6348 has an average benchmark score of 1930, and the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 has an average score of 1907. Both are at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Opteron 6348 has a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3's boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Opteron also has a higher base clock at 2.80 GHz versus 2.40 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Opteron 6348 | Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 12 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 115 W | 85 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket G34 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Piledriver | Haswell |

| Codename | Abu Dhabi | Haswell-EP |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | 2x 315 mm² | 356 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (per die) | 15 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2012-11-04 | 2014-09-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $575 | $417 |

| Part Number | OS6348WKTCGHK | SR207 |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 6348 wins every head-to-head benchmark in this comparison. It outperforms the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 in all six Cinebench tests, with margins between 1.0% and 1.2%. For users prioritizing raw Cinebench performance, the Opteron is the clear choice. Its 12 physical cores, higher clock speeds, and consistent lead across both single-core and multi-core workloads make it the better performer on the recorded metrics.

The Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3, however, is not far behind. Its 6 cores with hyper-threading deliver 12 threads, and it trails the Opteron by only a single point in some tests (93 vs. 94 in R15 single-core, 391 vs. 395 in R20 single-core). The Xeon also has a lower TDP of 85 W versus 115 W, which could be a consideration for dense server deployments where power draw is a factor. But the specifications do not always tell the whole story: the Xeon uses newer DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3, which might offer advantages in systems that leverage those newer standards.

In terms of absolute benchmark performance, the Opteron 6348 wins. The database shows it with an average score of 1930, slightly above the Xeon's 1907. The nearest rival to the Opteron, the Intel Core i7-1180G7, matches its score exactly, while the Xeon's closest competitor, the Intel Xeon E3-1285 v4, also matches its score. This tells a story of two chips in the same performance class, with the AMD part having a narrow but definitive edge.

For a server or workstation workload that is heavily threaded, the Opteron 6348's 12 cores provide a slight advantage. For single-threaded tasks, the Opteron's higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz versus 3.20 GHz gives it the edge. The Xeon E5-2620 v3 is the better choice if the system requires DDR4 memory support, PCIe Gen 3 lanes, or lower power consumption, but based purely on benchmark scores, the AMD Opteron 6348 is the winner. It holds the higher average score, the higher percentile ranking among its rivals, and a 1.2% lead in the most demanding multi-core tests.