Opteron 6276 vs Ryzen 7 1700

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 1700
2017
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
9.33
+133%
Opteron 6276
2011
16 cores / 16 threads, 115 Watt
4.00

Ryzen 7 1700 outperforms Opteron 6276 by a whopping 133% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking8151414
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.875.09
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7no data
Power efficiency13.583.29
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Interlagos (2011−2012)
Release date2 March 2017 (7 years ago)14 November 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329$119

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Opteron 6276 has 32% better value for money than Ryzen 7 1700.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed3 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier30no data
L1 cache768 KB768 KB
L2 cache4096 KB16 MB
L3 cache16384 KB8 MB (per die)
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size192 mm2316 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million2,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)4
SocketAM4G34
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt115 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA3+
AVX++
SenseMI+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanes20no data

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.

Ryzen 7 1700 9.33
+133%
Opteron 6276 4.00

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.

Ryzen 7 1700 14815
+133%
Opteron 6276 6348

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.

Ryzen 7 1700 1026
+187%
Opteron 6276 357

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.

Ryzen 7 1700 5209
+113%
Opteron 6276 2441

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.33 4.00
Recency 2 March 2017 14 November 2011
Physical cores 8 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 115 Watt

Ryzen 7 1700 has a 133.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 76.9% lower power consumption.

Opteron 6276, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores.

The Ryzen 7 1700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Opteron 6276 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 7 1700 is a desktop processor while Opteron 6276 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 1700 and Opteron 6276, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 7 1700
Ryzen 7 1700
AMD Opteron 6276
Opteron 6276

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 1525 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 1700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 51 vote

Rate Opteron 6276 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 1700 or Opteron 6276, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.