AMD Opteron 6366 HE vs Intel Xeon E-2104G Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture across the entire Cinebench suite: the Intel Xeon E-2104G wins every single recorded test against the AMD Opteron 6366 HE. The multicore results are the closest comparisons, with the Xeon taking a 1.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore (488 vs. 480). The gap narrows slightly in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Xeon scores 2035 against the Opteron's 2003, a 1.6% margin. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Xeon again holds a 1.6% advantage, scoring 4847 versus 4771. These are tight margins, but they are consistent across all three generations of the Cinebench test, indicating a structural advantage rather than a test-specific anomaly.

The single-core results tell a similar story, though the absolute leads are even smaller. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 68 against the Opteron's 67, a 1.5% edge. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the Xeon at 287 versus 282, a 1.8% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core has the Xeon at 684 versus 673, again a 1.6% delta. The largest single-test margin in the entire comparison is the 1.8% in R20 single-core; no test shows a double-digit percentage difference. This is not a matchup where one processor dominates by a wide margin; instead, the Intel part edges out the AMD part in every discipline, but the differences are measured in single percentage points.

The aggregate statistics reinforce this narrow but decisive performance profile. The Xeon E-2104G has an average benchmark score of 1402, while the Opteron 6366 HE averages 1379. That is a difference of roughly 1.7% in favor of the Intel chip. In the database's percentile ranking versus all CPUs, the Xeon sits at the 37th percentile, while the Opteron is at the 36th. These adjacent percentile positions confirm that the two processors occupy essentially the same performance tier in the overall database, with the Intel part holding a slight but measurable edge.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each chip provides additional context. The Xeon E-2104G is flanked by the Intel Xeon E3-1220 v5 (average score 1401, a 0.1% delta), the Intel Pentium Gold G7400TE (1404, a -0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i5-6500TE (1399, a 0.2% delta). The Opteron 6366 HE sits alongside the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U (1379, 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 (1379, 0% delta), and the Intel Core i7-3740QM (1378, 0.1% delta). These nearest-rival groups show that the Xeon is competing with modern low-power desktop and entry workstation parts, while the Opteron is grouped with older mobile and desktop quad-cores. The performance parity between the two compared CPUs is clear, but their competitive neighborhoods are distinct.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded benchmark wins, the Intel Xeon E-2104G is the winner in every category measured. It holds the advantage in all three multicore tests, which is notable because the Opteron has four times the core count. The Xeon's 1.6% to 1.7% lead in multicore workloads suggests that its per-core efficiency and higher base clock of 3.20 GHz are sufficient to overcome the Opteron's 16 cores operating at a base clock of 1800.00 MHz, even with the Opteron's boost clock of 3.10 GHz.

In single-core workloads, the Xeon also wins, with margins ranging from 1.5% to 1.8%. This is the expected outcome given the architectural differences: the Xeon is built on a newer 14 nm process with a recent Coffee Lake design, while the Opteron uses the older 32 nm Piledriver architecture. The data shows that the Xeon's single-thread performance is consistently better, which is critical for lightly threaded applications such as legacy database queries, single-threaded scripting, and older server workloads that do not scale across many cores.

There is no category in the recorded data where the AMD Opteron 6366 HE wins. The wins column shows 6 for the Xeon and 0 for the Opteron. This does not mean the Opteron is without merit, but the benchmark suite used here does not capture any advantage for it. The Opteron's strengths, if any, would have to manifest in workloads not covered by these Cinebench tests. For example, the Opteron's quad-channel DDR3 memory bus offers a theoretical memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, which is higher than the Xeon's dual-channel DDR4 bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. However, no memory bandwidth benchmark is present in the head-to-head data, so this advantage is not quantified in the recorded results.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, reflecting their different release eras and design philosophies. The Intel Xeon E-2104G is a Coffee Lake-S WS part, built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and no boost clock listed. The die size is 126 mm². Its cache hierarchy is per-core: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and it includes ECC memory support. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics P630, and the PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It uses Intel Socket 1151.

The AMD Opteron 6366 HE is an Abu Dhabi part, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 1800.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The die is composed of two chips, each 315 mm², totaling 2,400 million transistors. Its cache layout is different: 768 KB of L1 total, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 8 MB of L3 per die. It supports DDR3 memory on a quad-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and it also supports ECC memory. There is no integrated graphics, and the PCIe interface is Gen 2. It uses AMD Socket G34.

The core count difference is the most obvious architectural contrast: 16 cores versus 4. However, the Opteron's cores are based on the Piledriver architecture, which is a module-based design where each module shares some resources. The Xeon's 4 cores are full-fat Coffee Lake cores with individual L1 and L2 caches. The process node difference (14 nm vs. 32 nm) explains much of the efficiency gap, as does the release date: the Xeon launched in 2018, while the Opteron launched in 2012. The Xeon's TDP is 65 W, while the Opteron's is 85 W, despite the Opteron having four times the cores. This reflects the newer process and architecture.

Memory support also differs sharply. The Opteron's quad-channel DDR3 setup provides higher theoretical bandwidth (59.7 GB/s) than the Xeon's dual-channel DDR4 (42.7 GB/s). However, the Xeon supports newer DDR4 memory, which typically offers lower latency and higher clock speeds per module. The PCIe generation difference (Gen 3 vs. Gen 2) also favors the Xeon for modern expansion cards and NVMe storage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G has an average benchmark score of 1402, while the AMD Opteron 6366 HE has an average of 1379, a difference of about 1.7% in favor of the Intel chip.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G has 4 cores and 4 threads. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the largest margin of victory in any head-to-head test?

A: The largest margin is 1.8%, achieved by the Intel Xeon E-2104G in the Cinebench R20 single-core test, where it scored 287 versus the Opteron's 282.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory. The Intel Xeon E-2104G supports ECC on DDR4, and the AMD Opteron 6366 HE supports ECC on DDR3.

Q: What are the memory bus configurations?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G uses a dual-channel DDR4 bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE uses a quad-channel DDR3 bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2104G includes UHD Graphics P630. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Xeon E-2104G outperforms the AMD Opteron 6366 HE in every benchmark recorded in the database. The Xeon wins all six head-to-head tests, with margins between 1.5% and 1.8%. Its average benchmark score is 1402 versus 1379, and it holds a higher percentile ranking (37th vs. 36th). For any workload represented by the Cinebench suite, which includes both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks, the Xeon is the better choice.

The Xeon's advantage is primarily architectural. Its 14 nm Coffee Lake design, with 4 high-performance cores running at 3.20 GHz, delivers superior per-core performance compared to the Opteron's 16 Piledriver cores at a lower base clock. The Xeon also benefits from a 2018 release date versus 2012, a newer memory standard (DDR4), and a more modern PCIe interface (Gen 3). The Opteron's higher core count and larger theoretical memory bandwidth (59.7 GB/s vs. 42.7 GB/s) do not translate into a win in the recorded benchmarks.

The Opteron 6366 HE might still be relevant for legacy systems that require its specific socket (G34) or its quad-channel DDR3 memory configuration, but the benchmark data does not support a performance-based argument for choosing it over the Xeon. The nearest rivals for the Opteron include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U and the Intel Core i7-3740QM, both of which are much newer or lower-power parts; this shows that the Opteron is firmly in an older performance class.

For a system builder or integrator choosing between these two specific parts, the Intel Xeon E-2104G is the correct pick based on the recorded measurements. It wins every test, has a higher average score, and offers modern platform features like DDR4 and integrated graphics. The Opteron's only potential advantage lies in raw core count and memory bandwidth, neither of which produces a benchmark win in this dataset. The verdict is straightforward: the Xeon E-2104G is the superior processor in every measured category.