AMD Opteron 6378 vs Intel Core i3-8100T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a remarkably consistent picture for these two processors. Across all six shared benchmark tests, the AMD Opteron 6378 takes the win, with no benchmark favoring the Intel Core i3-8100T. The margins are strikingly uniform, hovering around 10.7% to 11.3% in favor of the older AMD part.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 504 against the i3-8100T's 450, a 10.7% gap. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story: 71 versus 63, a slightly larger 11.3% deficit for Intel. Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds with the Opteron at 2102 and Intel at 1876 in multi-core, a 10.8% difference. The R20 single-core result repeats that exact 10.8% delta, with scores of 296 and 264.

The newest benchmark in the set, Cinebench R23, continues the trend. The Opteron 6378 posts 5005 multi-core and 706 single-core, while the i3-8100T manages 4467 and 630 respectively. The multi-core gap is 10.7%, and the single-core gap is 10.8%. This consistency across different Cinebench versions suggests a stable performance relationship that does not shift with workload generation or software updates.

What stands out in this data is not just that AMD wins every test, but that the winning margin barely moves. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the delta stays within a narrow band of 10.7% to 11.3%. This is unusual. Most processors show different scaling characteristics between single-core and multi-core tests. Here, the 16-core Opteron and the 4-core i3-8100T produce nearly identical relative outcomes regardless of thread count, which points to a fundamental per-thread efficiency difference rather than a core-count advantage.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The i3-8100T averages 1500 across all its recorded tests, while the Opteron 6378 averages 1447. That is a counterintuitive result given the head-to-head results. The Intel part has a higher average score despite losing every direct comparison. This occurs because the two CPUs were tested against different benchmark suites. The i3-8100T includes Geekbench scores in its average, while the Opteron does not have Geekbench results recorded. The i3-8100T's Geekbench multi-core score of 3142 and single-core score of 1104 pull its average upward.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context. The i3-8100T sits at the 38th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 1500. Its closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-3770S at 1498, a delta of just 0.1%. The AMD Opteron 6344 trails at 1492, only 0.6% behind. The i3-8100T also edges out the Intel Core i7-8665U by 0.8%. These are tight groupings, indicating that the i3-8100T is firmly placed in a dense cluster of mid-range processors from several generations.

The Opteron 6378 also sits at the 38th percentile, but with a lower average score of 1447. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-7300HQ at 1448, a 0.1% difference in Intel's favor. The Intel Xeon E3-1505L v5 is 0.1% behind the Opteron, and the AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE is 0.2% behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G trails by 0.6%. Despite being a 16-core server part from 2012, the Opteron 6378 lands in the same percentile bracket as a 2018 desktop quad-core. The database's percentile metric, which factors in all recorded CPUs, places both processors at the same 38th percentile, suggesting they occupy similar positions in the overall performance distribution, even though their average scores differ by roughly 3.5%.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 6378 outperforms the Intel Core i3-8100T in every directly comparable test. The margins are consistent, ranging from 10.7% to 11.3% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core variants. Anyone choosing between these two strictly on measured performance should select the Opteron 6378.

However, the database shows that the i3-8100T has a higher average benchmark score of 1500 versus 1447 for the Opteron. This is an artifact of different test suites being recorded for each chip. The i3-8100T's Geekbench results, which are not available for the Opteron, boost its average. The head-to-head results are the more reliable comparison because they use identical workloads.

The Opteron's wins are not marginal. A 10.7% lead in multi-core Cinebench R23 is substantial. A 10.8% lead in single-core R23 is even more surprising given that the Opteron has a lower base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 3.10 GHz for the i3-8100T. The Opteron does have a boost clock of 3.30 GHz, which the i3-8100T lacks entirely (its boost clock field is null). Even so, a 10.8% single-core advantage for a 2012 server chip over a 2018 desktop chip demands attention.

For a buyer, the data says the Opteron 6378 is the faster processor in measured benchmarks. The i3-8100T does offer integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), a feature the Opteron lacks. That could matter for a system without a discrete GPU. The i3-8100T also uses DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3, whereas the Opteron uses DDR3 and PCIe Gen 2. But in raw CPU compute, the Opteron wins every recorded test.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6378 wins in all six head-to-head benchmark tests. There is no test in the database where the Intel Core i3-8100T comes out ahead. This makes a use-case split difficult because the Opteron dominates every measured workload category.

That said, the nature of the wins differs. The Opteron's multi-core lead of 10.7% in Cinebench R23 is notable, but its single-core lead of 10.8% is arguably more significant. A processor that wins single-core tests by that margin will generally feel snappier in everyday tasks that rely on per-thread performance. The Opteron's boost clock of 3.30 GHz likely contributes here, allowing it to exceed its 2.40 GHz base clock when fewer cores are active.

The i3-8100T's advantages are not in benchmark scores but in platform characteristics. It has integrated graphics, which the Opteron does not. It supports DDR4 memory, offering a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s on a dual-channel bus, while the Opteron has a quad-channel DDR3 setup with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron's higher memory bandwidth is a clear win for memory-intensive workloads, but the i3-8100T's modern memory type may offer lower latency in some scenarios.

For workloads that are heavily multi-threaded, the Opteron's 16 cores versus 4 cores would suggest a larger advantage than the recorded 10.7%. The benchmark data shows that Cinebench scaling does not favor the Opteron as much as its core count implies. This is likely due to the Opteron's older Piledriver architecture, which has lower per-core efficiency than Coffee Lake.

The i3-8100T is the better choice for a system requiring integrated graphics, such as a basic desktop or a media center. The Opteron is the better choice for raw compute performance, especially in a server or workstation context where its quad-channel memory and 16 cores can be utilized, even if the benchmark advantage is modest.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Opteron 6378 scores 5005, which is 10.7% higher than the Intel Core i3-8100T's 4467.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-8100T win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The AMD Opteron 6378 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, with the i3-8100T recording zero wins.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R15?

A: The Opteron 6378 scores 71, while the i3-8100T scores 63. The Opteron leads by 11.3%.

Q: How do these processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The i3-8100T has an average score of 1500, while the Opteron 6378 has an average of 1447. Both sit at the 38th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The i3-8100T supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron 6378 supports DDR3 with a quad-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: The i3-8100T includes Intel UHD Graphics 630. The Opteron 6378 has no integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two chips is stark. The Intel Core i3-8100T uses Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node from Intel. The AMD Opteron 6378 uses Piledriver architecture on a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The process node difference is two generations apart, with Intel's 14 nm being significantly denser than AMD's 32 nm.

The i3-8100T has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.10 GHz and no boost clock recorded. Its cache layout is per-core: 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with a shared 6 MB L3. The die size is 126 mm², and the socket is Intel Socket 1151.

The Opteron 6378 is a much larger chip. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The cache design is module-based: 768 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. The die size is listed as 2x 315 mm², and the transistor count is 2,400 million. It uses AMD Socket G34.

The core count difference is the most obvious architectural distinction. The Opteron has four times the cores of the i3-8100T. Yet the benchmark results show only a 10.7% multi-core advantage. This suggests that Piledriver cores are substantially less efficient per thread than Coffee Lake cores. The i3-8100T's 14 nm process and newer architecture allow it to compete despite a 12-core deficit.

The memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The i3-8100T uses a dual-channel DDR4 interface with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron uses a quad-channel DDR3 interface with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Opteron's memory bandwidth is 55% higher, which could benefit workloads that are memory-bound. However, DDR3 has higher latency than DDR4, which could offset some of that bandwidth advantage in latency-sensitive tasks.

PCIe support differs as well. The i3-8100T has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Opteron has PCIe Gen 2. This means the Intel platform supports faster peripheral connectivity, though the Opteron's server platform may support more total lanes across its socket.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field recorded in the database.

| Specification | Intel Core i3-8100T | AMD Opteron 6378 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 16 |

| Threads | 4 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.10 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | None | 3.30 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 115 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket G34 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Piledriver |

| Codename | Coffee Lake | Abu Dhabi |

| Process node | 14 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Die size | 126 mm² | 2x 315 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 768 KB total |

| L2 cache | 256 KB per core | 2 MB per module |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 8 MB per die |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | None |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2018-04-01 | 2012-11-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $117 | $867 |

The TDP difference is substantial: 35 W versus 115 W. The i3-8100T draws less than a third of the Opteron's power budget. This makes the Intel chip far more suitable for compact or passively cooled systems. The Opteron, with its 115 W TDP, requires serious cooling and a server-class motherboard.

The release dates are nearly six years apart. The Opteron launched in late 2012, while the i3-8100T arrived in early 2018. The process node and memory type differences reflect this generational gap. The i3-8100T supports ECC memory, as does the Opteron, but the Opteron's quad-channel DDR3 is a server-oriented feature that the dual-channel DDR4 of the i3-8100T does not match in bandwidth.

The launch MSRP difference is also notable: $117 for the i3-8100T versus $867 for the Opteron. However, both parts are now end-of-life, so current market pricing would depend on availability and demand. The Opteron's higher launch price reflected its 16-core server positioning, while the i3-8100T was aimed at budget desktops.