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

Intel Core i5 4690

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 4690

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 4690

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4690

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much better performance per watt 11 pt/W vs 2.08 pt/W More than 5.2x better performance per watt
Significantly lower typical power consumption 68.25W vs 93.44W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 2,214 vs 1,311 Around 70% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer May, 2014 vs Nov, 2012 Release date over 1 years later
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year vs 27.7 $/year More than 25% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year vs 100.74 $/year More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Opteron 6328

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 6328

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Significantly more l3 cache 16 MB vs 6 MB Around 2.8x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 4 vs 1 3 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration
Much better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 19,224 vs 11,272 More than 70% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
More l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 4690 vs Opteron 6328

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4690
11,272
Opteron 6328
19,224

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4690
4,870,000 MB/s
Opteron 6328
2,280 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 4690  vs
Opteron 6328 
Clock speed 3.5 GHz 3.2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.9 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 1150
G34
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Quad Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 25,600 MB/s

details

Core i5 4690  vs
Opteron 6328 
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 16 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 4
Clock multiplier 32 19
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 71.7°C

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,200 MHz N/A

power consumption

TDP 84W 115W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 27.7 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 100.74 $/year
Performance per watt 11 pt/W 2.08 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 93.44W

bus

Architecture DMI 2.0 HyperTransport 3.0
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Intel Core i5 4690
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 6328
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus