Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of AMD FX 6300

AMD FX 6300

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD Opteron 280

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 280

Report a correction
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Lower typical power consumption 69.06W vs 77.19W More than 10% lower typical power consumption
Higher Maximum operating temperature 67 °C vs 62.5 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower annual home energy cost 20.48 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 10% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 74.46 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 10% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 6300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6300

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 2 MB 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 45% higher clock speed
Much better performance per watt 9.84 pt/W vs 1.05 pt/W More than 9.2x better performance per watt
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.75 GHz vs 2.67 GHz Around 80% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 6 vs 2 Three times as many cores; run more applications at once
Significantly better PassMark score 6,444 vs 1,272 More than 5x better PassMark score
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,446 vs 756 More than 90% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Oct, 2012 vs Sep, 2005 Release date over 7 years later
More threads 6 vs 2 Three times as many threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.82 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Opteron 280 vs FX 6300

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Opteron 280
2,507
FX 6300
7,871

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 6300
2,053

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Opteron 280
98,350 MB/s
FX 6300
2,290,000 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Opteron 280
1,272
FX 6300
6,444

PassMark (Single Core)

FX 6300
1,446

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Opteron 280  vs
FX 6300 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Hexa core
Socket type
940
AM3+

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

details

Opteron 280  vs
FX 6300 
Threads 2 6
L2 cache 2 MB 6 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 2 1
Clock multiplier 12 20
Voltage range 1.2 - UnknownV 0.8 - 1.43V
Operating temperature 0 - 67°C Unknown - 62.5°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.67 GHz 4.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.4 GHz 4.82 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 1,347.7 7,541
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.67 GHz 4.75 GHz

power consumption

TDP 85W 95W
Annual home energy cost 20.48 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 74.46 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 1.05 pt/W 9.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 69.06W 77.19W
AMD Opteron 280
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus