CPU Comparison

The benchmark data presents an intriguing paradox: a 4-core desktop processor from 2014 and a 16-core server chip from 2012 produce nearly identical results in modern rendering tests. The Intel Core i5-4690 and AMD Opteron 6376 both land at the 36th percentile among all CPUs, with average benchmark scores of 1375 and 1370 respectively. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel part wins every single contest, yet the margins are razor-thin, never exceeding 0.4%. This is not a story of dominance; it is a story of architectural philosophies converging on the same performance plateau, achieved through radically different means.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core i5-4690 is the safer choice for single-socket, latency-sensitive workloads. It wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, including the Cinebench R23 multi-core test where it scores 4754 against the Opteron’s 4736, a 0.4% edge. For users running desktop-class applications, the i5-4690’s higher base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz, combined with its 22 nm Haswell architecture, delivers consistent, if marginal, superiority.

The AMD Opteron 6376, however, should not be dismissed. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, while older and clocked lower at 2.30 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost, nearly match the i5-4690 in every test. The R15 multi-core score of 477 versus 479 is within noise. For server environments where ECC memory support and quad-channel DDR3 bandwidth (59.7 GB/s) are non-negotiable, the Opteron 6376 remains a viable platform, the data shows its average score of 1370 places it alongside the Intel Core i7-2600, with a 0% delta. The verdict is clear: pick the i5-4690 for desktop responsiveness and edge-case performance wins; pick the Opteron 6376 for server-class memory features and raw core count, accepting that benchmark parity comes with a 115 W TDP versus 84 W.

Architecture Differences

The foundational divergence lies in process technology and die design. The Intel Core i5-4690 uses a 22 nm node fabricated by Intel, packing 1,400 million transistors into a 177 mm² die. The AMD Opteron 6376, built on GlobalFoundries’ 32 nm process, uses a dual-die configuration with 2,400 million transistors spread across two 315 mm² dies, effectively a 630 mm² total footprint. This explains the Opteron’s higher 115 W TDP and its server-oriented design.

Cache hierarchies tell the story of different threading models. The i5-4690 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, plus a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Opteron 6376 uses a module-based approach: 768 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. The Intel part’s per-core L2 is designed for low-latency access from any of its 4 cores, while the AMD part’s shared L3 per die supports its 16-core topology. Both support DDR3 memory, but the i5-4690 uses dual-channel while the Opteron 6376 uses quad-channel, with the latter explicitly listing a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Feature sets diverge sharply. The i5-4690 includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics and PCIe Gen 3 support, making it a complete desktop package. The Opteron 6376 has no integrated graphics and only PCIe Gen 2, reflecting its server role. The Opteron compensates with ECC memory support, a feature absent from the i5-4690. Both have locked multipliers, but the Opteron’s production status is listed as end-of-life, while the i5-4690’s status is unspecified.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent: the Intel Core i5-4690 wins every test, but the margins are almost negligible. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-4690 scores 479 against the Opteron’s 477, a 0.4% delta. The single-core R15 test is a perfect tie at 67 points each, a 0% delta that suggests the Opteron’s Piledriver cores, despite lower clocks, can match Haswell’s per-thread performance in this specific workload.

Moving to R20, the pattern holds. The i5-4690 leads multi-core with 1996 versus 1989 (0.4% delta) and single-core with 281 versus 280 (0.4% delta). R23 follows the same script: multi-core 4754 versus 4736 (0.4% delta) and single-core 671 versus 668 (0.4% delta). The consistency of the 0.4% margin across all multi-threaded tests is striking, it suggests the i5-4690’s architectural efficiency per core exactly compensates for the Opteron’s 4x core count advantage.

The biggest wins each way are subtle. The i5-4690’s largest margin is its 0.4% lead in R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, and R23 multi-core and single-core. The Opteron’s best result is its tie in R15 single-core, where it loses by 0%, the only test where it does not trail. For a 16-core server chip to match a modern 4-core desktop part in single-threaded rendering is noteworthy; it implies that the Opteron’s per-core performance, while lower-clocked, is not as far behind as the core count disparity would suggest.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights where these two processors diverge most clearly:

• Cores and Threads: 4 cores/4 threads (i5-4690) versus 16 cores/16 threads (Opteron 6376)
• Base Clock: 3.40 GHz versus 2.30 GHz
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz versus 3.20 GHz
• TDP: 84 W versus 115 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1150 versus AMD Socket G34
• Process Node: 22 nm versus 32 nm
• Transistors: 1,400 million versus 2,400 million
• Die Size: 177 mm² versus 2x 315 mm²
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core versus 768 KB total
• L2 Cache: 256 KB per core versus 2 MB per module
• L3 Cache: 6 MB shared versus 8 MB per die
• Memory Bus: Dual-channel versus Quad-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: Not listed versus 59.7 GB/s
• ECC Memory: False versus True
• PCIe: Gen 3 versus Gen 2
• Integrated Graphics: Intel HD 4600 versus None
• Market Segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation
• Release Date: 2014-04-30 versus 2012-11-04

The launch MSRP for the Opteron 6376 was $703; the i5-4690 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Opteron 6376 has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4690 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Did the Opteron win any benchmark?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-4690 won all six head-to-head benchmark tests, including a 0% delta tie in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Q: How close are their average benchmark scores?

A: The i5-4690 averages 1375, while the Opteron 6376 averages 1370. The i5-4690’s nearest rival list includes the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 at 1379 (-0.3% delta), while the Opteron’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-2600 at 1370 (0% delta).

Q: Which supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Opteron 6376 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-4690 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Opteron?

A: The AMD Opteron 6376 has a listed memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, enabled by its quad-channel DDR3 memory bus.

Q: Does the i5-4690 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-4690 includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics. The AMD Opteron 6376 has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-4690 wins in every benchmark category, but the practical implications go beyond raw scores. Its 0.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (4754 versus 4736) suggests that for single-socket rendering tasks, the i5-4690’s 4 fast cores outperform the Opteron’s 16 slower cores. The i5-4690 also wins on power efficiency: its 84 W TDP is 27% lower than the Opteron’s 115 W, meaning lower cooling requirements and potentially quieter operation. The integrated HD 4600 graphics make it a complete desktop solution, and its PCIe Gen 3 support is newer than the Opteron’s Gen 2.

The AMD Opteron 6376 wins on raw hardware features that matter in server contexts. Its 16 cores provide headroom for heavily threaded workloads that scale beyond 4 threads, even if Cinebench does not show an advantage. The quad-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth double the i5-4690’s dual-channel capacity, which is critical for memory-bound server applications. ECC memory support is a non-negotiable requirement for many data-center environments, and the Opteron provides it while the i5-4690 does not. The 2,400 million transistors and dual-die design indicate a more complex memory subsystem, even if the 32 nm process makes it less efficient.

The data does not show a clear winner for all use cases. For desktop users running typical applications, the i5-4690’s benchmark wins and lower TDP make it the logical choice. For server administrators prioritizing memory integrity and bandwidth, the Opteron 6376’s feature set, despite its benchmark parity, is the only option that meets those requirements. The 0.4% deltas are statistically insignificant; the real decision hinges on platform features, not rendering scores.