AMD Opteron 6376 vs Intel Core i7-3615QE Comparison

Intel Core i7-3615QE and AMD Opteron 6376 are two processors from different eras and market segments, yet their benchmark results place them in the same performance tier. The Intel chip, a 45W mobile part built on Ivy Bridge, consistently edges out the 115W server-oriented Opteron in every measured Cinebench test. Despite the Opteron's massive core-count advantage, the data shows a near-tie in aggregate performance, with the Intel part holding a narrow but consistent lead across all six benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent: Intel wins every single test, but by margins that are almost negligible. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-3615QE scores 481 against the Opteron's 477, a 0.8% advantage. The single-core R15 test is a perfect tie at 67 points each, with the delta recorded as 0%. These results set the pattern for the entire comparison: the Intel part wins, but never by more than 1.1%.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i7-3615QE scores 283 versus 280 for the Opteron 6376, a 1.1% lead. Multi-core results in R20 show the Intel part at 2005 versus 1989, again a 0.8% gap. The pattern holds in R23: the Intel chip scores 4774 multi-core and 674 single-core, while the AMD chip scores 4736 and 668 respectively, translating to 0.8% and 0.9% leads for Intel.

What makes these numbers striking is the context. The Opteron 6376 packs 16 cores while the i7-3615QE has only 4 cores with 8 threads. Yet the multi-core tests show the Intel part ahead by the same 0.8% margin as the single-core tests. This suggests that per-core efficiency, clock behavior, and cache design fully compensate for the Opteron's four-fold core-count advantage. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the i7-3615QE averages 1381 across all tests, while the Opteron averages 1370.

The benchmark data also places both chips identically in the broader landscape. Each sits at the 36th percentile of all CPUs. The i7-3615QE's nearest rivals include the AMD Opteron 6238 (average score 1383, delta -0.1%), the AMD Opteron 6366 HE (1379, +0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U (1379, +0.2%). The Opteron 6376's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-2600 (1370, 0%), Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2 (1368, +0.1%), and Intel Xeon D-1521 (1367, +0.2%). Both processors cluster within a few points of their nearest competitors.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is substantial. The i7-3615QE uses Intel's Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22nm process node, built by Intel itself. The Opteron 6376 uses AMD's Piledriver architecture on a 32nm node, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. This process advantage helps explain why the Intel part achieves comparable performance at a fraction of the power envelope.

Transistor counts and die sizes tell a story of different design philosophies. The Intel chip packs 1,400 million transistors into a 160 mm² die. The AMD Opteron uses 2,400 million transistors spread across two dies of 315 mm² each, totaling 630 mm². That is nearly four times the silicon area for the AMD part, yet it produces essentially the same benchmark scores.

Core organization differs fundamentally. The i7-3615QE has 4 cores with 8 threads, supporting simultaneous multithreading. The Opteron 6376 has 16 physical cores but no additional threads, meaning 16 threads total. Cache hierarchies also diverge: the Intel chip provides 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, with 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part lists 768 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die.

Clock speeds are close but favor Intel. Both start at 2.30 GHz base, but the Intel chip boosts to 3.30 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for the AMD part. This 0.10 GHz boost advantage, combined with the newer process node, likely accounts for the consistent single-core wins. The Opteron's architecture is designed for throughput, while the Intel part leverages higher per-core efficiency.

Memory support also separates the two. The Opteron 6376 supports DDR3 with quad-channel memory and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. The i7-3615QE uses dual-channel memory with no ECC support. The Opteron also carries PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel chip's PCIe specification is not listed in the data. The Intel part includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4000), while the Opteron has none.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the Intel Core i7-3615QE wins in every single measured category. It holds the advantage in both multi-core and single-core tests across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The margins range from 0.8% to 1.1%, with one tie in R15 single-core. This makes the Intel part the clear choice for any workload represented by these benchmarks.

The AMD Opteron 6376 has zero benchmark wins in this comparison. However, the data does show areas where it is competitive. In multi-core tests, the Opteron comes within 0.8% of the Intel part despite having four times the physical cores. This suggests that workloads which scale well with core count and can utilize up to 16 threads would see the Opteron performing much closer to parity than a 4-core versus 16-core comparison might suggest.

For single-threaded workloads, the Intel part's advantage is also present but minimal. The 1.1% lead in R20 single-core is the largest margin in the entire comparison. The data does not show any test where the Opteron's higher core count translates into a win, but the near-identical scores indicate that the Opteron's modular design provides competitive throughput in multi-core scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. Core count: 4 versus 16. Threads: 8 versus 16. Boost clock: 3.30 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. TDP: 45W versus 115W. Socket: Intel BGA 1023 versus AMD Socket G34. Architecture: Ivy Bridge versus Piledriver. Process node: 22nm versus 32nm. Foundry: Intel versus GlobalFoundries.

Cache configurations are entirely different. The Intel part uses per-core L1 and L2 with shared L3. The AMD part uses a total L1 figure, per-module L2, and per-die L3. Memory bus width differs: dual-channel versus quad-channel. ECC support: none versus supported. Integrated graphics: Intel HD 4000 versus none. Market segment: Mobile versus Server/Workstation. The Opteron has a launch MSRP of $703, while the Intel chip has no listed launch price.

The Opteron also has a production status of end-of-life, while the Intel part's status is not listed. Release dates are close: the Intel chip launched on 2012-04-28, and the AMD part on 2012-11-04. Part numbers differ (SR0NC versus OS6376WKTGGHK), and neither chip has an unlocked multiplier. The Opteron's memory support is explicitly listed as DDR3, while the Intel chip's memory support field is null.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE averages 1381 across all tests, while the AMD Opteron 6376 averages 1370.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Opteron 6376 has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two chips?

A: The Intel part has a TDP of 45W, whereas the AMD Opteron 6376 has a TDP of 115W.

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 6376 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Opteron 6376 supports ECC memory and uses quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip does not support ECC and uses dual-channel memory.

Q: In which benchmarks do these processors perform identically?

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, both score 67 points, resulting in a 0% delta. The Intel part wins all other measured tests.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE uses a 22nm process from Intel, while the AMD Opteron 6376 uses a 32nm process from GlobalFoundries.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but nuanced picture. The Intel Core i7-3615QE wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, making it the superior performer in every test measured. The margins are small, ranging from 0.8% to 1.1%, but they are consistent across both single-core and multi-core workloads. For anyone choosing strictly on benchmark performance, the Intel chip is the better option.

However, the specifications tell a different story about intended use. The Opteron 6376 is a server/workstation part with 16 cores, quad-channel memory, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 2, built for a Socket G34 platform. The i7-3615QE is a mobile part with integrated graphics, a 45W TDP, and a compact die size. The fact that the mobile Intel chip matches the server AMD chip in multi-core Cinebench tests is remarkable.

For workloads not represented by Cinebench, the Opteron's feature set — ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, 16 physical cores — may offer advantages that the benchmark data does not capture. The Intel part's integrated graphics and lower power draw make it suited for compact or mobile systems. The data shows that in pure Cinebench performance, the Intel chip is slightly ahead, but the Opteron's platform features are aimed at a different class of deployment.