Core i3-4158U vs Opteron 3320 EE

Core i3-4158U vs Opteron 3320 EE Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4158U

2 / 4

1,921

+0.2%

1,918

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-4158U vs Opteron 3320 EE FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-4158U vs Opteron 3320 EE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-4158U

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Iris Graphics 5100, while Opteron 3320 EE needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Opteron 3320 EE, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌1948% higher power demand at 512W vs 25W.

Opteron 3320 EE

2012

Why buy it

✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.
✅Draws 25W instead of 512W, a 487W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,918 vs 1,921).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4158U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4158U better than Opteron 3320 EE?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 3320 EE makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-4158U is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4158U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i3-4158U still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-4158U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-4158U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-4158U vs Opteron 3320 EE Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-4158U

The Core i3-4158U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,921 points. Launch price was $315.

Opteron 3320 EE

The Opteron 3320 EE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Delhi (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB (total). L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,918 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4158U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Opteron 3320 EE offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Opteron 3320 EE has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core i3-4158U versus 2.5 GHz on the Opteron 3320 EE — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Opteron 3320 EE (base: 2 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The Core i3-4158U uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Opteron 3320 EE uses Delhi (2012−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4158U scores 1,921 against the Opteron 3320 EE's 1,918 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i3-4158U. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4158U vs 8192 kB (total) on the Opteron 3320 EE.

Feature	Core i3-4158U	Opteron 3320 EE
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.5 GHz+25%
Base Clock	2 GHz+5%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	8192 kB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Delhi (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,921	1,918
Geekbench 6 Single	457	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4158U uses the FCBGA1168 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Opteron 3320 EE uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4158U	Opteron 3320 EE
Socket	FCBGA1168	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Core i3-4158U) / not specified (Opteron 3320 EE). The Core i3-4158U includes integrated graphics (Intel Iris Graphics 5100), while the Opteron 3320 EE requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4158U targets Multimedia.