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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Xeon E5-4650

Reasons to consider the
Intel Xeon E5-4650

Report a correction
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,483 vs 1,124 More than 30% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much more l3 cache 20 MB vs 16 MB 25% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Significantly higher clock speed 2.7 GHz vs 2.5 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much more l3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 2.5x more l3 cache per core
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.7 GHz vs 2.5 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 6380

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 6380

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 16 MB vs 2 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Higher turbo clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 3.3 GHz Around 5% higher turbo clock speed
Lower typical power consumption 93.44W vs 105.63W More than 10% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual commercial energy cost 100.74 $/year vs 113.88 $/year More than 10% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 27.7 $/year vs 31.32 $/year More than 10% lower annual home energy cost
Newer Nov, 2012 vs May, 2012 Release date 5 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Xeon E5-4650 vs Opteron 6380

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Xeon E5-4650
11,960
Opteron 6380
10,082

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Xeon E5-4650  vs
Opteron 6380 
Clock speed 2.7 GHz 2.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.4 GHz
Cores Octa core 16 core
Socket type
LGA 2011
G34

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support 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
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 130W 115W
Annual home energy cost 31.32 $/year 27.7 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 113.88 $/year 100.74 $/year
Performance per watt 2.52 pt/W 1.46 pt/W
Typical power consumption 105.63W 93.44W

bus

Architecture QPI HyperTransport 3.0
Transfer rate 8,000 MT/s 6,400 MT/s
Clock speed 4,000 MHz 3,200 MHz

details

Xeon E5-4650  vs
Opteron 6380 
Threads 16 16
L2 cache 2 MB 16 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 20 MB 16 MB
L3 cache per core 2.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 4 4

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.94 GHz 2.93 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.7 GHz 2.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.94 GHz 2.93 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Quad Channel Quad Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 51,200 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Intel Xeon E5-4650
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 6380
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
There is no evidence here for why either is faster than the other. Clock speed means nothing. Hyperthreading is a made up term by intel so of course no AMD cpu has it. It doesnt even have any performance gain in most applications, it just looks pretty. Lets please see some multithreaded benchmarks that are able to use the full 16 cores of the opteron. I've personally used both and would reccomend the AMD because it has greater performance in heavyweight applications and real server/workstation work than the intel which cost 3x as much. one of the only real refrences i could find: http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/795/AMD_Opteron_6300_series_6380_vs_Intel_Xeon_E5-4650.html
comments powered by Disqus