CPU Comparison

The AMD Opteron 6380 dominates the Intel Core i5-7600T across every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, winning all six tests with a consistent 12.5–12.6% advantage. Despite the Intel part being a much newer 14nm design with a higher clock speed, the Opteron’s 16 cores and larger cache pool deliver superior throughput in both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. The data shows a clear, unambiguous performance hierarchy: the older server chip outperforms the desktop chip in every measured scenario, though both land at the same 40th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they target similar overall performance tiers despite their architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Opteron 6380 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks against the Intel Core i5-7600T, with zero wins for the Intel part.

Q: How large is the Opteron’s performance advantage in multi-core tests?

A: In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, the Opteron leads by 12.6% each time, scoring 572 vs 500, 2386 vs 2086, and 5683 vs 4968 respectively.

Q: What is the single-core performance gap between the two?

A: The Opteron wins single-core tests by 12.5% in Cinebench R15 (80 vs 70) and R20 (336 vs 294), and by 12.6% in R23 (802 vs 701).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Opteron has an average benchmark score of 1643, while the i5-7600T scores slightly higher at 1664, putting the Intel part marginally ahead in aggregate despite losing every direct head-to-head test.

Q: What memory configurations do they support?

A: The Intel i5-7600T uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support, while the Opteron 6380 uses quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: The Intel Core i5-7600T is listed as Active, while the AMD Opteron 6380 is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 6380 wins outright in raw compute performance, taking every single head-to-head benchmark by a margin of roughly 12.5% to 12.6%. This applies uniformly across both multi-core and single-core workloads, meaning the Opteron is not just a multi-threaded specialist, it simply executes Cinebench workloads faster in all configurations. The Opteron’s advantage is consistent and systematic, suggesting a fundamental architectural edge in this test suite rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Intel Core i5-7600T, conversely, wins no benchmark comparisons. Its only statistical advantage appears in aggregate scoring, where its average benchmark score of 1664 edges out the Opteron’s 1643. This aggregate figure, however, includes Geekbench results that the Opteron does not have in its benchmark list, so the comparison is not apples-to-apples. The i5-7600T’s strengths lie elsewhere: it consumes only 35W TDP versus the Opteron’s 115W, features integrated HD 630 graphics, and uses a modern DDR4 platform. For users prioritizing power efficiency, integrated graphics, or a current socket, the Intel part wins on platform attributes rather than computational performance.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-7600T is built on Kaby Lake architecture using a 14nm process at Intel’s foundry, while the AMD Opteron 6380 uses Piledriver architecture on a 32nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel chip integrates 4 cores and 4 threads, whereas the Opteron packs 16 cores and 16 threads, a fourfold core-count difference. The Opteron’s die is described as 2x 315 mm² with 2,400 million transistors, while the i5-7600T lacks listed transistor or die size data in the fact pack.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The Intel part provides 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, plus 6 MB shared L3. The AMD chip offers 768 KB total L1, 2 MB L2 per module, and 8 MB L3 per die. This gives the Opteron more aggregate cache, particularly at the L3 level where it has 16 MB total (8 MB per die across two dies) versus the Intel’s 6 MB. The Opteron’s modular Piledriver design groups cores into modules sharing L2, which is a fundamental architectural difference from Intel’s per-core L2 allocation.

Memory support also differs sharply. The i5-7600T uses dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. The Opteron uses quad-channel DDR3 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, a higher-bandwidth, server-oriented memory subsystem. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Intel chip offers Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Opteron provides only Gen 2. The Intel part includes integrated HD 630 graphics, while the Opteron has none. Finally, the Opteron’s socket is AMD Socket G34, a server platform, whereas the i5-7600T uses Intel Socket 1151.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts present the starkest contrast: 4 cores/4 threads for the Intel versus 16 cores/16 threads for the AMD. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for the Intel and 2.50 GHz for the AMD, while boost clocks are 3.70 GHz and 3.40 GHz respectively. The Intel chip has a 35W TDP compared to the Opteron’s 115W. Process nodes differ as expected: 14nm for Intel, 32nm for AMD.

Cache specifications reflect the architectural split: the Intel has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, while the AMD has 768 KB total L1 and 2 MB per module L2. L3 cache is 6 MB shared on the Intel versus 8 MB per die on the AMD. Memory support differs completely: DDR4 dual-channel with 38.4 GB/s for Intel, versus DDR3 quad-channel with 59.7 GB/s for AMD. ECC memory is absent on the Intel but present on the AMD. PCIe generation differs (Gen 3 vs Gen 2), and integrated graphics exist only on the Intel (HD 630). The AMD has a launch MSRP of $1088, while the Intel has no listed launch MSRP. The Opteron’s part number is OS6380WKTGGHK, and the Intel’s is SR336. Release dates are January 2017 for the Intel and November 2012 for the AMD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Opteron 6380 wins every benchmark by a nearly identical margin, which is remarkable for its consistency. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Opteron scores 572 against the Intel’s 500, a 12.6% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 80 vs 70, a 12.5% advantage. These margins repeat in R20: multi-core 2386 vs 2086 (12.6%) and single-core 336 vs 294 (12.5%). The pattern holds in R23 with multi-core 5683 vs 4968 (12.6%) and single-core 802 vs 701 (12.6%).

The uniformity of these results, all falling between 12.5% and 12.6%, suggests a consistent IPC or clock-efficiency advantage for the Opteron in this workload, independent of thread count. Even in single-core tests where the Intel’s 3.70 GHz boost clock exceeds the Opteron’s 3.40 GHz, the AMD chip still wins by 12.5%, indicating that the Opteron’s per-core efficiency in Cinebench is substantially higher. The Intel’s only benchmark victories come in Geekbench, where it scores 3447 multi-core and 1246 single-core, but the Opteron has no Geekbench scores in the fact pack for comparison, so these cannot be directly evaluated head-to-head.

Looking at nearest rivals for context, the i5-7600T’s closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-6700TE with an average score of 1666 (0.1% faster), followed by the i7-4770HQ at 1660 (0.3% faster). The Opteron’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-5700HQ at 1645 (0.1% faster), with the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G at 1640 (0.2% slower). Both processors sit in the same performance neighborhood as these mid-range rivals, confirming that the Opteron’s 16 cores do not elevate it into a higher tier despite its server pedigree.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 6380 is the faster processor in every head-to-head benchmark, winning all six Cinebench tests by a consistent 12.5–12.6% margin. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads, the Opteron is the clear choice. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, combined with 16 MB of L3 cache and quad-channel DDR3 memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, deliver superior throughput despite older 32nm Piledriver architecture and lower clock speeds than the Intel part.

The Intel Core i5-7600T, however, offers compelling advantages that the benchmark scores do not capture. Its 35W TDP is less than a third of the Opteron’s 115W, making it vastly more power-efficient. It includes integrated HD 630 graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. It uses modern DDR4 memory and a current Socket 1151 platform, and it remains in Active production status. The Opteron, by contrast, is End-of-life, uses DDR3, and targets the server/workstation segment with its Socket G34 platform.

The choice ultimately depends on use case. For multi-threaded rendering or server-style workloads where raw Cinebench performance is paramount and power consumption is secondary, the Opteron 6380 wins outright. Its 12.6% lead in multi-core tests is substantial and consistent. For desktop users who need integrated graphics, lower power draw, or a modern platform, the i5-7600T is the more practical option, but the data shows it cannot match the Opteron’s compute performance. The Opteron’s $1088 launch MSRP also reflects its server positioning, though the Intel part’s lack of a listed MSRP prevents direct pricing comparison. Both processors land at the 40th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they deliver similar overall performance levels, but the Opteron does so in every measured benchmark while the Intel relies on platform features to compete.