Xeon E-2224G vs Opteron 6380
Aggregate performance score
Xeon E-2224G outperforms Opteron 6380 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1297 | 1171 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.53 | 10.43 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon E |
| Architecture codename | Abu Dhabi (2012) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 5 November 2012 (11 years ago) | 27 May 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,150 | $213 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon E-2224G has 582% better value for money than Opteron 6380.
Detailed specifications
Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 768 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (per die) | 8 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 69 °C |
| Number of transistors | 2,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 4 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | G34 | Socket H4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 71 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | no data | + |
Security technologies
Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Xeon E-2224G outperforms Opteron 6380 by 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Xeon E-2224G outperforms Opteron 6380 by 14% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon E-2224G outperforms Opteron 6380 by 273% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Xeon E-2224G outperforms Opteron 6380 by 37% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.32 | 4.93 |
| Recency | 5 November 2012 | 27 May 2019 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 71 Watt |
Opteron 6380 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Xeon E-2224G, on the other hand, has a 14.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 62% lower power consumption.
The Xeon E-2224G is our recommended choice as it beats the Opteron 6380 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 6380 and Xeon E-2224G, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
