AMD Opteron 6276

The AMD Opteron 6276 is a 16-core server processor from the Bulldozer/Interlagos generation, released in late 2011 for the G34 socket. Its average benchmark score of 1560 places it at the 40th percentile among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 40% of the processors in the database but lags behind the majority of modern desktop and server parts. The data shows a part that was designed for high-throughput multi-threaded server workloads, yet its age and architecture leave it firmly in entry-level territory today.

Benchmark Performance

The Opteron 6276’s benchmark results reveal a processor that is competitive with low-end desktop chips from several generations newer. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 5395 is respectable for a 16-core part, while the single-core score of 761 is significantly weaker. The R20 results follow a similar pattern: 2265 multicore and 319 single-core. The older R15 test shows 543 multicore and 76 single-core.

Comparing the average benchmark score of 1560 to its nearest rivals shows a tight cluster. The Intel Core i5-4690S matches it exactly at 1560, with a delta of 0%. The Intel Core i5-6600T scores 1561, which is 0.1% higher. The Intel Atom x7835RE scores 1558, 0.1% lower. The Intel Core i3-8300 scores 1557, 0.2% lower. These deltas are negligible in real-world terms; the Opteron 6276 sits in a performance band where a single generation of Intel's low-power desktop parts delivers similar aggregate throughput.

In absolute terms, the multicore scores indicate that the processor can handle multi-threaded workloads like rendering or compilation, but not at modern speeds. A Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5395 is roughly what a mid-range consumer desktop CPU achieved around 2018-2019, while the single-core score of 761 is far below even entry-level parts from that era. The data suggests that the Opteron 6276 is best viewed as a legacy server part that still functions adequately for basic parallel tasks, but it is not competitive in any performance-sensitive scenario.

Power and Thermals

The Opteron 6276 carries a TDP of 115 watts. For a 16-core processor from 2011, this is a moderate power draw, reflecting the Bulldozer architecture’s relatively low clock speeds and its 32 nm manufacturing process from GlobalFoundries. The processor is built on a 32 nm node with 2,400 million transistors spread across a dual-die design, with each die measuring 315 mm².

A 115-watt TDP implies that a capable air cooler is sufficient for this processor, provided the chassis has adequate airflow. The socket is AMD Socket G34, which was designed for dual-socket server motherboards, so in practice the cooling solution would typically be a server-grade heatsink or a tower cooler with a 120mm fan. The thermal density is not extreme, but the dual-die layout means that heat is generated across two separate chips, which can complicate cooling if the heatsink does not cover both dies evenly.

For a modern builder considering this part, the power draw is not prohibitive, but it is not efficient either. A modern 16-core processor with a similar TDP would deliver significantly higher performance, so the 115-watt figure is only acceptable in the context of a legacy system where the motherboard and platform are already in place. The lack of an unlocked multiplier means no overclocking headroom, which limits the ability to trade power for performance.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The split between single-thread and multi-thread performance is stark and definitive. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 5395 is 7.09 times the single-core score of 761. In R20, the ratio is 7.10 (2265 vs 319). This indicates that the processor scales well across its 16 cores, but each core is individually very weak.

The single-core scores are the primary bottleneck. A Cinebench R23 single-core score of 761 is roughly half of what a modern budget desktop CPU achieves, meaning that any workload with a serial component, such as gaming, web browsing, or spreadsheet calculations, will feel sluggish. The Bulldozer architecture’s design, where pairs of cores share resources, contributes to this weakness; the 16 threads are not fully independent in terms of execution resources.

For real workloads, this split means the Opteron 6276 is suitable for tasks that are embarrassingly parallel, such as video encoding, scientific simulations, or running multiple virtual machines. It is poorly suited for interactive use or for applications that rely on a single fast thread. The data suggests that if a workload cannot utilize at least 8 threads effectively, the processor will underperform relative to its 16-core count.

How It Compares

Intel Core i5-4690S: The i5-4690S matches the Opteron 6276 exactly in average benchmark score (1560 vs 1560, 0% delta). However, the i5-4690S is a quad-core desktop part from 2014 with much higher single-thread performance. In practice, the i5-4690S would feel significantly faster in everyday tasks, while the Opteron would only pull ahead in highly parallel workloads that can use more than 4 cores effectively.

Intel Core i5-6600T: The i5-6600T scores 1561, which is 0.1% higher than the Opteron 6276. This is another quad-core low-power desktop chip, and the near-identical average score masks a completely different performance profile. The i5-6600T dominates in single-threaded tasks but falls behind in raw multi-threaded throughput. For a server workload with many concurrent threads, the Opteron would be the better choice; for a desktop or light workstation, the i5-6600T is clearly superior.

Intel Atom x7835RE: The Atom x7835RE scores 1558, 0.1% lower than the Opteron 6276. This is a low-power embedded processor, and its similar average score is surprising given that it has fewer cores. The Atom part likely achieves this via better single-thread efficiency, while the Opteron relies on core count. In a server context, the Opteron’s 16 cores would handle more simultaneous threads, but the Atom would consume far less power and generate less heat.

Intel Core i3-8300: The i3-8300 scores 1557, which is 0.2% lower than the Opteron 6276. This is a quad-core desktop CPU from 2018 with hyper-threading, giving it 8 threads. The average score is nearly identical, but the i3-8300 offers much stronger single-thread performance and better power efficiency. The Opteron only wins in workloads that can saturate all 16 of its threads, which is rare outside of dedicated server applications.

Who Should Consider It

The Opteron 6276 is a niche part for specific use cases. Given its 40th percentile ranking and 16-core design, the primary audience is someone running a legacy server platform on Socket G34 who needs to upgrade or replace a failed CPU. In that context, the 115-watt TDP and DDR3 quad-channel memory support (with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth) are known quantities, and the processor will deliver predictable performance for existing server workloads.

For multi-threaded creation workloads like video rendering or 3D animation, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5395 is workable but unimpressive. A modern 8-core desktop CPU would likely match or exceed this score while offering far better single-thread performance. Therefore, the Opteron 6276 is only worth considering if the motherboard and DDR3 memory are already available at no cost.

For gaming, the single-core score of 761 in Cinebench R23 makes this processor a poor choice. Modern games rely heavily on single-thread performance, and this part would bottleneck even a modest graphics card. The same applies to office productivity: web browsers, document editors, and spreadsheet applications are largely single-threaded, so the 16-core count provides no benefit.

The realistic buyer is a homelab enthusiast or a small business running legacy server software that is licensed per-socket and benefits from high core counts. The processor’s ECC memory support and server-grade platform are its main advantages. For anyone building a new system, the data strongly recommends against this part.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance percentile of the AMD Opteron 6276?

A: The processor sits at the 40th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms 40% of tested processors.

Q: How does the Opteron 6276 compare to the Intel Core i5-4690S?

A: The average benchmark scores are identical at 1560, with a delta of 0%. The i5-4690S is a quad-core desktop part, so it has much higher single-thread performance, while the Opteron offers more cores.

Q: What is the TDP of the Opteron 6276, and what cooling does it need?

A: The TDP is 115 watts. This implies a capable air cooler is sufficient, given that the processor has no unlocked multiplier and runs at a base clock of 2.30 GHz with a boost of 3.20 GHz.

Q: Does the Opteron 6276 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, it supports ECC memory, and it uses DDR3 with a quad-channel memory bus providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Is the Opteron 6276 good for gaming?

A: No. The single-core score in Cinebench R23 is 761, which is very low, and gaming workloads depend heavily on single-thread performance. The 16 cores do not help in most games.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Opteron 6276?

A: The launch MSRP was $788.