AMD Opteron 6366 HE vs Intel Xeon W-2104 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unusually one-sided. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE wins all six recorded Cinebench comparisons against the Intel Xeon W-2104. The margins are narrow, but they are consistent across every workload type and every generation of the Cinebench test.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 480 against the Xeon's 470, a delta of -2.1% from the Intel part's perspective. The single-core result follows the same pattern: 67 for the AMD chip versus 66 for the Intel chip, a -1.5% gap. That 1-point difference in single-core is small enough to be considered a statistical tie, but it still registers as a win for the Opteron.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Opteron again takes both tests. Multi-core shows 2003 versus 1960, a -2.1% delta. Single-core shows 282 versus 276, also -2.1%. The consistency of that -2.1% figure across R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, and R23 multi-core suggests a fixed performance ratio between these two processors in Cinebench's modern rendering workloads.

Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern. Multi-core: 4771 for the Opteron, 4669 for the Xeon, -2.1%. Single-core: 673 versus 659, -2.1%. The Opteron's largest margin comes in R15 single-core at -1.5%, but that is still a win.

The average benchmark scores in the database tell a similar story. The Opteron 6366 HE averages 1379 across all recorded tests, while the Xeon W-2104 averages 1350. That is a 2.1% advantage for the AMD part, which matches the head-to-head deltas. Both processors sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same tier of overall performance.

When placed against their nearest rivals, neither chip stands out dramatically. The Xeon W-2104 is effectively tied with the Intel Core i5-4670 (delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core i5-7400T (delta 0.1%), while trailing the Intel Xeon E3-1226 v3 by -0.5%. The Opteron 6366 HE is exactly tied with the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 (both 0.0% delta), and it edges the Intel Core i7-3740QM by 0.1%. The Opteron's nearest-rival cluster is slightly stronger on average, which aligns with its small but consistent lead over the Xeon.

The takeaway from the raw numbers is that this is not a contest of large margins. It is a contest of repeated small wins. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE does not crush the Intel Xeon W-2104 in any single test, but it beats it in every recorded test. For workloads that rely on Cinebench-style rendering, the Opteron is the safer pick by a slim but dependable margin.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Opteron 6366 HE wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests against the Intel Xeon W-2104. The database records 0 wins for the Intel part and 6 wins for the AMD part.

Q: How large is the AMD Opteron 6366 HE's biggest winning margin?

A: The largest margin is -2.1% in the Xeon's disfavor, appearing in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The only different margin is Cinebench R15 single-core at -1.5%.

Q: Are these two chips in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes. Both the Intel Xeon W-2104 and the AMD Opteron 6366 HE are recorded at the 36th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2104 has an average benchmark score of 1350. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE has an average benchmark score of 1379, which is 29 points higher.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Xeon W-2104 is within 0.8% of its nearest rivals, ranging from -0.5% against the Intel Xeon E3-1226 v3 to +0.8% against the Intel Core i5-4590T. The Opteron 6366 HE is within 0.1% of its nearest rivals, ranging from -0.1% against the Intel Core i7-3615QE to +0.1% against the Intel Core i7-3740QM.

Q: Do the single-core and multi-core results tell different stories?

A: No. The Opteron leads in both single-core and multi-core across all three Cinebench versions. The single-core deltas are -1.5% (R15) and -2.1% (R20 and R23). The multi-core deltas are -2.1% in all three versions.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies and eras. The Intel Xeon W-2104 is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-W variant, using a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. Its die size is 484 mm². The AMD Opteron 6366 HE uses the Piledriver architecture under the Abu Dhabi codename, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Its die is listed as 2x 315 mm², indicating a dual-die package with a total of 2,400 million transistors.

Core counts differ sharply. The Xeon W-2104 has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Opteron 6366 HE has 16 cores and 16 threads. That is a 4x difference in core count, yet the Opteron only leads by about 2% in multi-threaded Cinebench scores. This reflects the massive per-core performance gap between the newer Intel architecture and the older AMD design.

Cache layouts are also fundamentally different. The Xeon W-2104 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8.25 MB of shared L3 cache. The Opteron 6366 HE has 768 KB of total L1 cache, 2 MB of L2 cache per module, and 8 MB of L3 cache per die. The Opteron's cache structure is built around modules rather than individual cores, which is a hallmark of the Piledriver design.

Memory support diverges as well. The Xeon W-2104 uses DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus and a peak bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The Opteron 6366 HE uses DDR3 memory, also with a quad-channel bus, but peaks at 59.7 GB/s. The Intel part has a 43% bandwidth advantage on paper, though the benchmark data does not isolate memory-bound workloads.

PCIe generations differ. The Xeon W-2104 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 48 lanes from the CPU. The Opteron 6366 HE supports only PCIe Gen 2. For modern expansion cards or NVMe storage, the Intel platform has a clear interface advantage.

Both processors support ECC memory, which is expected for server and workstation parts. Neither has integrated graphics. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Xeon W-2104 and the AMD Opteron 6366 HE:

• Cores: 4 (Intel) versus 16 (AMD)
• Threads: 4 (Intel) versus 16 (AMD)
• Base clock: 3.20 GHz (Intel) versus 1800.00 MHz (AMD)
• Boost clock: None listed (Intel) versus 3.10 GHz (AMD)
• TDP: 120 W (Intel) versus 85 W (AMD)
• Socket: Intel Socket 2066 versus AMD Socket G34
• Architecture: Skylake (Intel) versus Piledriver (AMD)
• Codename: Skylake-W (Intel) versus Abu Dhabi (AMD)
• Process node: 14 nm (Intel) versus 32 nm (AMD)
• Foundry: Intel versus GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: Not listed (Intel) versus 2,400 million (AMD)
• Die size: 484 mm² (Intel) versus 2x 315 mm² (AMD)
• L1 cache: 64 KB per core (Intel) versus 768 KB total (AMD)
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core (Intel) versus 2 MB per module (AMD)
• L3 cache: 8.25 MB shared (Intel) versus 8 MB per die (AMD)
• Memory support: DDR4 (Intel) versus DDR3 (AMD)
• Memory bandwidth: 85.3 GB/s (Intel) versus 59.7 GB/s (AMD)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 48 lanes (Intel) versus Gen 2 (AMD)
• Release date: 2017-08-28 (Intel) versus 2012-11-04 (AMD)
• Launch MSRP: $255 (Intel) versus $575 (AMD)
• Part number: SR3LH (Intel) versus OS6366VATGGHK (AMD)

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6366 HE wins every recorded benchmark. That is the simple answer. But the context matters. The Opteron's wins are narrow, between 1.5% and 2.1%, despite having four times as many cores. This means the Opteron is the better choice for Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering, but only by a small margin. The 16-core AMD part does not deliver anywhere near the scaling one would expect from its core count advantage.

The Intel Xeon W-2104 does not win any recorded benchmark. However, the database shows it has substantial advantages in platform-level features. It supports DDR4 memory with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth versus the Opteron's DDR3 at 59.7 GB/s. It uses PCIe Gen 3 with 48 lanes versus the Opteron's PCIe Gen 2. It has a smaller process node (14 nm versus 32 nm), which typically translates to better power efficiency per unit of work. Its TDP is higher at 120 W versus 85 W, but its base clock is significantly higher at 3.20 GHz versus 1.80 GHz.

For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth or PCIe throughput, the Xeon W-2104 is the stronger platform despite losing the CPU benchmark tests. For workloads that are purely CPU-bound in Cinebench-style rendering, the Opteron 6366 HE is the winner, but the margin is too small to call it a decisive victory.

The Opteron also offers a much lower TDP of 85 W compared to the Xeon's 120 W. In a dense server environment, that power difference could matter. The Xeon's higher TDP comes with a newer architecture and a later release date (2017 versus 2012), so it is the more modern platform overall.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but narrow winner. The AMD Opteron 6366 HE outperforms the Intel Xeon W-2104 in every Cinebench test recorded in the database. If the selection criteria is purely CPU rendering performance, choose the Opteron. Its margins are consistent, and it achieves these wins while drawing less power (85 W TDP versus 120 W).

However, the Xeon W-2104 has substantial platform advantages that are not reflected in the CPU benchmark scores. It supports DDR4 memory with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 43% higher than the Opteron's DDR3 bandwidth. It offers PCIe Gen 3 with 48 lanes, a major upgrade over the Opteron's PCIe Gen 2. It is built on a 14 nm process versus the Opteron's 32 nm, and it has a significantly higher base clock of 3.20 GHz versus 1.80 GHz.

For a system where memory bandwidth, storage interface speed, or expansion capability matters more than raw Cinebench scores, the Xeon W-2104 is the better foundation. For a system dedicated to multi-threaded CPU rendering where every point of benchmark score counts, the Opteron 6366 HE is the better choice.

The Opteron's 16 cores and 16 threads do not translate into a proportional performance advantage. The Xeon's 4 cores and 4 threads nearly match it in every test. This suggests that the Xeon's per-core performance is vastly superior, and the Opteron only wins through sheer core count. In modern workloads that are not heavily multi-threaded, the Xeon would likely perform better per core, though the database does not include such tests.

Both processors sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs, so neither is a high-performance part by current standards. They are end-of-life products from different eras. The Opteron wins the benchmark war by a nose. The Xeon wins the platform war by a wide margin. Choose based on which war matters more for the intended workload.