AMD Opteron 6274

AMD Opteron 6274 is a 16-core, 16-thread server processor built on the Bulldozer architecture, codenamed Interlagos, and its benchmark results place it in the 37th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1387. The data shows a processor that is competitive with mid-range desktop and older server parts from its era, but its age and architecture limits its standing against modern silicon. With a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, this chip relies heavily on core count rather than raw per-thread speed, a trait that defines its single-thread versus multi-thread performance split.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The gap between single-core and multi-core scores is stark. In Cinebench R23, the Opteron 6274 scores 677 in single-core and 4796 in multi-core, a ratio of roughly 7.1:1 in favor of multi-threaded workloads. This indicates that the processor is heavily optimized for parallel tasks, where its 16 physical cores can be fully utilized. In single-threaded applications, the 2.20 GHz base clock and 3.10 GHz boost clock are modest, and the Bulldozer architecture’s per-core efficiency is not competitive with modern designs. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 68 and R20 single-core score of 284 reinforce this: these numbers are low even compared to many dual-core laptop chips, meaning any workload that depends on a single thread will see lackluster performance.

Real-world implications: tasks like spreadsheet recalculation, light web browsing, or legacy software that runs on one or two threads will feel sluggish. Conversely, heavily threaded workloads—video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific simulations, and database queries—will scale well across the 16 cores. The multi-core scores in Cinebench R15 (483), R20 (2014), and R23 (4796) show a consistent ability to handle parallel processing, though the absolute numbers are modest by current standards. For example, the R23 multi-core score of 4796 is about 7x the single-core score, but that multi-core result is still below what many modern 8-core desktop CPUs achieve, indicating that raw core count does not compensate for older architecture inefficiencies. The data suggests that the Opteron 6274 is a parallel-throughput engine, not a low-latency responsive part.

Power and Thermals

The Opteron 6274 has a TDP of 115 watts, which classifies it as a high-power server processor. This TDP level implies that a capable air cooler or a basic server heatsink is sufficient for stock operation, but it is not a chip for passive cooling or ultra-dense low-power chassis. The 32 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, with 2,400 million transistors on a dual-die design (2x 315 mm²), means the thermal density is moderate for its era, but the 115 W TDP is notable compared to modern high-efficiency parts. A cooling solution designed for 115 W-class processors—such as a tower cooler with a 120mm fan or a server-grade active heatsink—would be adequate. The architecture does not support aggressive undervolting or overclocking (multiplier is locked), so thermal behavior is predictable under load. For a server environment where sustained multi-core loads are common, the 115 W TDP requires adequate chassis airflow, but it is not extreme by server standards. The power draw scales with core utilization, and given the 16 cores, a fully loaded system will dissipate that 115 W consistently, meaning thermal management should be planned for continuous operation rather than bursty workloads.

Who Should Consider It

This processor is best suited for workloads that are explicitly multi-threaded and can use 16 threads without needing high per-thread performance. For video rendering and 3D animation, the multi-core Cinebench scores (483 in R15, 2014 in R20, 4796 in R23) show it can handle rendering tasks, though slowly by modern standards. For office productivity—word processing, email, spreadsheet work—the low single-core scores (68 in R15, 284 in R20, 677 in R23) mean it is a poor choice; such applications are mostly single-threaded or lightly threaded. Gaming is also unsuitable, as games typically rely on 1-4 cores with high clock speeds; the 2.20 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost are insufficient, and the single-core scores are far below what modern gaming CPUs achieve. For server workloads like database hosting, virtualization (if the host supports it), or batch data processing, the 16 cores and 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth (quad-channel DDR3) are beneficial. The 768 KB of shared L1 cache, 2 MB per module L2, and 8 MB per die L3 (two dies, so 16 MB total) are adequate for keeping multiple threads fed, but the low clock speeds will bottleneck latency-sensitive tasks. In short, consider it only for parallel batch processing, not interactive or single-threaded work.

How It Compares

Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3: This rival has an average benchmark score of 1389, which is 0.1% higher than the Opteron 6274’s 1387. The delta is negligible, meaning they perform nearly identically on average. However, the Xeon has fewer cores but higher per-thread efficiency, so for single-threaded tasks, it will be vastly superior, while the Opteron holds its own in multi-threaded workloads. The data shows a tie on average, but the workload type will determine the winner.

Intel Core i3-8109U: With an average score of 1391, this is 0.3% ahead of the Opteron. This is a dual-core mobile processor, yet it matches a 16-core server chip on average. This highlights the Bulldozer architecture’s inefficiency: the i3-8109U has far higher single-thread performance, and its multi-thread performance is close enough that the average evens out. For any single-threaded application, the i3 wins decisively; for heavily multi-threaded tasks, the Opteron may edge ahead, but not by a large margin.

AMD Opteron 6238: This is the closest rival, with an average score of 1383, which is 0.3% lower than the 6274. Both are Opteron parts from the same generation, so the 6274’s slight edge likely comes from its higher core count or clock speeds. The delta is tiny, meaning they are interchangeable in most workloads, though the 6274 has a small advantage in multi-threaded scenarios.

Intel Core i7-3615QE: With an average score of 1381, this is 0.4% behind the Opteron. The i7-3615QE is a quad-core mobile processor, yet it nearly matches a 16-core server chip. Again, the i7’s superior single-thread performance compensates for its lower core count. In multi-threaded rendering, the Opteron will win, but in everyday tasks, the i7 is much faster.

Platform and Compatibility

The Opteron 6274 uses AMD Socket G34, which is a server socket designed for dual-socket configurations. It supports DDR3 memory with a quad-channel memory bus, providing 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported, which is essential for server reliability. The PCIe support is Gen 2, which is older but functional for server expansion cards. The platform is end-of-life, meaning no new motherboards are in production, and the upgrade path is limited to other G34 Opterons from the same generation, such as the Opteron 6238. The processor has a locked multiplier, so no overclocking is possible. The part number is OS6274WKTGGGU, and it was released on November 13, 2011. The launch MSRP is $639. The architecture is Bulldozer, codenamed Interlagos, and it is built on a 32 nm process with 2,400 million transistors across two dies, each 315 mm². The cache hierarchy includes 768 KB shared L1, 2 MB per module L2, and 8 MB per die L3, which totals 16 MB L3 across the two dies. For upgrade path considerations, users are stuck with this platform unless they change the motherboard and memory entirely.

FAQ

Q: Is this processor good for gaming?

A: No. The single-core scores (68 in Cinebench R15, 284 in R20, 677 in R23) are very low, and gaming relies on high per-thread performance. The 2.20 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost clocks are insufficient for modern games.

Q: Can I use this for video editing?

A: Yes, for multi-threaded rendering tasks. The multi-core scores (483 in R15, 2014 in R20, 4796 in R23) show it can handle parallel video encoding, though slowly compared to modern CPUs.

Q: Does it support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is true, and the memory bus is quad-channel DDR3 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Is it overclockable?

A: No, the multiplier is locked, so the base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 3.10 GHz are fixed.

Q: What socket does it use?

A: It uses AMD Socket G34, which is an older server socket that supports the Opteron (Interlagos) generation.

Q: How does it compare to a modern CPU?

A: The average benchmark score of 1387 places it in the 37th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it is slower than about 63% of processors tested. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score, but modern CPUs have far higher single-thread performance.

Benchmark Performance

The average benchmark score of 1387 places the Opteron 6274 in the 37th percentile, meaning it outperforms only about a third of all CPUs in the database. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon E3-1240L v3, scores 1389, a 0.1% difference—essentially a statistical tie. The Intel Core i3-8109U scores 1391, 0.3% higher, and the AMD Opteron 6238 scores 1383, 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i7-3615QE scores 1381, 0.4% lower. These deltas are tiny, all within half a percent, indicating that the Opteron 6274 is tightly clustered with its peers in overall average performance. However, this average hides the massive single-thread versus multi-thread disparity. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score of 4796 is more than 7 times the single-core score of 677. In R20, the multi-core score of 2014 is about 7.1 times the single-core 284. In R15, the multi-core 483 is about 7.1 times the single-core 68. This consistent ratio shows that the chip’s strength is purely in parallel workloads. Relative to its rivals, the Opteron 6274’s multi-core advantage is clear when compared to the mobile i3-8109U or i7-3615QE, which have far fewer cores. But the deltaPct values indicate that on average, the extra cores only barely compensate for the Bulldozer architecture’s low per-core throughput. For instance, the i3-8109U is a dual-core part, yet it still averages 0.3% higher overall, meaning the Opteron’s 16 cores do not provide a decisive multi-core lead in typical mixed workloads. The data suggests that the Opteron 6274 is a niche part: it excels only when all 16 threads are saturated, and it falls behind even low-power modern chips in any latency-sensitive or single-threaded task.