Opteron 6278 vs Xeon E5-2667 v4

Opteron 6278 vs Xeon E5-2667 v4 Performance Spectrum

Opteron 6278

16 / 16

13,733

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon E5-2667 v4

8 / 16

13,776

+0.3%

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.

Opteron 6278 vs Xeon E5-2667 v4 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.

Opteron 6278 vs Xeon E5-2667 v4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Opteron 6278

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 115W instead of 135W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2667 v4 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,733 vs 13,776).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 25 MB).

Xeon E5-2667 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+212.5% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 8 MB).

Trade-offs

❌17.4% higher power demand at 135W vs 115W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2667 v4 better than Opteron 6278?

Yes. Xeon E5-2667 v4 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 14.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-2667 v4 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2667 v4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 212.5% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2667 v4 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E5-2667 v4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon E5-2667 v4 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2012), 212.5% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 8 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 16/16. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Opteron 6278 vs Xeon E5-2667 v4 Technical Specifications

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

Opteron 6278

The Opteron 6278 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Interlagos (2011−2012) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per module). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G34. Thermal design power (TDP): 115 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 13,733 points. Launch price was $988.

Xeon E5-2667 v4

The Xeon E5-2667 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 25 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 13,776 points. Launch price was $2,057.

⚡

Processing Power

The Opteron 6278 packs 16 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2667 v4 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Opteron 6278 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Opteron 6278 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2667 v4 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Xeon E5-2667 v4 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Opteron 6278 uses the Interlagos (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5-2667 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Opteron 6278 scores 13,733 against the Xeon E5-2667 v4's 13,776 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5-2667 v4. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Opteron 6278 vs 25 MB on the Xeon E5-2667 v4.

Feature	Opteron 6278	Xeon E5-2667 v4
Cores / Threads	16 / 16+100%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz	3.6 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	3.2 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	25 MB+213%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per module)	2 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Interlagos (2011−2012)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	13,733	13,776

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Opteron 6278 uses the G34 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5-2667 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.