Opteron 6380 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

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 6380 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G 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 6380 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Opteron 6380

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +21.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.1 vs 22.7 PassMark/$ ($551 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).
❌76.9% higher power demand at 115W vs 65W.

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

2018

Why buy it

✅Costs $257 less on MSRP ($294 MSRP vs $551 MSRP).
✅Delivers 86.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.7 vs 12.1 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $551 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 115W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Opteron 6380 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,661 vs 6,687).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Opteron 6380, which brings 16 cores / 16 threads.

Quick Answers

So, is Opteron 6380 better than Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 6380 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Opteron 6380 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 21.6% 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, Opteron 6380 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

Opteron 6380 is still the better call for a fresh build. Opteron 6380 comes in 87.4% more expensive on MSRP at $551 MSRP versus $294 MSRP, and it still gives you a 21.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 6,661 PassMark with 4 cores and 4 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Opteron 6380 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G Technical Specifications

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

Opteron 6380

The Opteron 6380 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Abu Dhabi (2012) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G34. Thermal design power (TDP): 115 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,687 points. Launch price was $1,150.

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

The Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 May 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 6,661 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Opteron 6380 packs 16 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Opteron 6380 has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Opteron 6380 versus 3.5 GHz on the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G — a 2.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G. The Opteron 6380 uses the Abu Dhabi (2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Opteron 6380 scores 6,687 against the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G's 6,661 — a 0.4% lead for the Opteron 6380. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Opteron 6380 vs 4 MB on the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G.

Feature	Opteron 6380	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
Cores / Threads	16 / 16+300%	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.5 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)+100%	4 MB
L2 Cache	16 MB+700%	2 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Abu Dhabi (2012)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	6,687	6,661

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Opteron 6380 uses the G34 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Opteron 6380	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
Socket	G34	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Opteron 6380 was priced at $551, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G came in at $294. On launch pricing ($551 vs $294), Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G was $257 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Opteron 6380 delivers 12.1 pts/$ vs 22.7 pts/$ for the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G — making the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G the 60.5% better value option.

Feature	Opteron 6380	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
MSRP	$551	$294-47%
Performance per Dollar	12.1	22.7+88%
Release Date	2012	2018

Search Opteron 6380 on Amazon

Search Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.