AMD Opteron 6366 HE vs Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD part offers four times the core count and double the thread count.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds of each CPU?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE runs at a base clock of 1800.00 MHz and boosts up to 3.10 GHz. The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has a higher base clock of 2.80 GHz and boosts to 3.20 GHz.

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare in multi-core tests?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE leads in every recorded multi-core test. It scores 480 vs 476 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 2003 vs 1987 in R20 multi-core, and 4771 vs 4732 in R23 multi-core. The deltas range from 0.8% to 0.8%, all favoring AMD.

Q: Do the two processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Opteron 6366 HE and the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 support ECC memory. Both are classified in the server/workstation market segment.

Q: What memory channels does each CPU support?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE supports quad-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE has an average benchmark score of 1379, while the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has an average score of 1368. Both sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Opteron 6366 HE is built on Piledriver architecture under the codename Abu Dhabi, part of the Opteron 6000 series. It uses a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries and integrates 2,400 million transistors across a dual-die design measuring 2x 315 mm². The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 uses Ivy Bridge architecture under the codename Ivy Bridge-EN, fabricated on a 22 nm process at Intel, with 1,860 million transistors on a single 257 mm² die.

Cache organization differs substantially. The AMD chip has a total L1 cache of 768 KB, an L2 of 2 MB per module, and an L3 of 8 MB per die. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3. The AMD design spreads its 16 cores across two dies, while Intel concentrates 4 cores on one die with a larger shared L3.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE uses quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the Xeon E5-1410 v2 uses triple-channel DDR3 with 32.0 GB/s. PCIe support differs as well: AMD implements Gen 2, while Intel provides Gen 3 with 24 lanes (CPU only).

Both processors lack integrated graphics and have locked multipliers. The AMD chip carries the part number OS6366VATGGHK and was released in November 2012. The Intel part has the part number SR1B0 and was released in January 2014. Both are end-of-life products in the server/workstation segment.

The socket platforms are incompatible. AMD uses Socket G34, while Intel uses Socket 1356. This means platform choice is determined by the motherboard and existing infrastructure rather than the CPUs themselves.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the AMD Opteron 6366 HE winning all six head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas between 0.7% and 0.8% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests. The margins are narrow but consistent. In R15 multi-core, AMD scores 480 against Intel's 476. In R20 multi-core, the gap is 2003 vs 1987. In R23 multi-core, AMD leads 4771 vs 4732.

For workloads that scale with cores, the AMD Opteron 6366 HE is the better choice on paper, offering 16 cores versus 4, though the benchmark deltas are far smaller than the core count difference suggests. The Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 compensates with a higher base clock of 2.80 GHz versus 1800.00 MHz, a smaller 22 nm process, and a newer release date.

The choice depends on platform fit. Systems built around AMD Socket G34 will favor the Opteron 6366 HE, while those on Intel Socket 1356 will use the Xeon E5-1410 v2. The data does not show a decisive performance winner; it shows a slight edge for AMD in every recorded test. Buyers with existing infrastructure on either socket should stay with their platform. The AMD part leads in memory bandwidth at 59.7 GB/s, which may matter for memory-bound server tasks.

The Intel part has a lower TDP of 80 W versus the AMD's 85 W, a marginal difference. Both CPUs sit at the 36th percentile of all CPUs, placing them in similar overall performance territory despite their architectural differences.

Specification Differences

• Cores: AMD Opteron 6366 HE has 16; Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 has 4
• Threads: AMD 16; Intel 8
• Base clock: AMD 1800.00 MHz; Intel 2.80 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 3.10 GHz; Intel 3.20 GHz
• TDP: AMD 85 W; Intel 80 W
• Socket: AMD Socket G34; Intel Socket 1356
• Architecture: AMD Piledriver (Abu Dhabi); Intel Ivy Bridge (Ivy Bridge-EN)
• Process node: AMD 32 nm at GlobalFoundries; Intel 22 nm at Intel
• Transistors: AMD 2,400 million; Intel 1,860 million
• Die size: AMD 2x 315 mm²; Intel 257 mm²
• L1 cache: AMD 768 KB total; Intel 64 KB per core
• L2 cache: AMD 2 MB per module; Intel 256 KB per core
• L3 cache: AMD 8 MB per die; Intel 10 MB shared
• Memory bus: AMD quad-channel; Intel triple-channel
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 59.7 GB/s; Intel 32.0 GB/s
• PCIe: AMD Gen 2; Intel Gen 3, 24 Lanes (CPU only)
• Release date: AMD November 2012; Intel January 2014
• Part number: AMD OS6366VATGGHK; Intel SR1B0

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Opteron 6366 HE wins every recorded benchmark against the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2. The largest multi-core margin appears in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, each showing a 0.8% delta in AMD's favor. In R15 multi-core, AMD scores 480 versus Intel's 476. In R20 multi-core, AMD scores 2003 versus 1987. In R23 multi-core, AMD scores 4771 versus 4732.

Single-core results are nearly identical. R15 single-core shows both CPUs at 67 points, with a 0% delta. R20 single-core has AMD at 282 versus Intel's 280, a 0.7% lead. R23 single-core has AMD at 673 versus Intel's 668, also a 0.7% lead. These single-core margins are negligible in practical terms, but they all favor AMD.

The average benchmark scores reflect the same pattern. AMD's average is 1379, and Intel's is 1368. AMD's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200, both at 1379 with a 0% delta, and the Intel Core i7-3740QM at 1378 with a 0.1% delta. Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1521 at 1367 with a 0.1% delta, the AMD Opteron 6376 at 1370 with a -0.1% delta, and the Intel Core i7-3820QM at 1366 with a 0.1% delta.

The core count disparity of 16 versus 4 does not translate into a proportional performance advantage. The recorded data shows the AMD part winning by less than 1% in every test. This suggests the Intel architecture delivers far higher per-core efficiency, likely due to its higher base clock and newer process node. The AMD part's eight extra cores and 16 threads provide a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded workloads, but the benchmark results do not show a large gap.

The memory bandwidth difference is the most pronounced specification gap, with AMD's 59.7 GB/s nearly double Intel's 32.0 GB/s. This could influence workloads that are sensitive to memory throughput rather than raw compute throughput. However, Cinebench workloads do not heavily stress memory bandwidth, which may explain why the benchmark deltas remain small.

Both processors are end-of-life and target the same server/workstation segment. The Intel part was released later in January 2014 compared to AMD's November 2012 release. The Intel part also uses PCIe Gen 3 with 24 lanes (CPU only), while AMD uses Gen 2. For modern systems requiring newer PCIe standards, the Intel part has an edge. For systems relying on maximum memory bandwidth, the AMD part is ahead.

The data indicates a statistical tie in practical performance, with AMD holding a slight but consistent lead across all six Cinebench tests. The choice between these two CPUs should be guided by platform compatibility and specific workload characteristics rather than benchmark scores, since the differences are within 1%.