In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD Opteron 8216 is marginally better than the AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Opteron 8216 was released over a year more recently than the Athlon 64 FX-53, and so the Opteron 8216 is likely to have better levels of support, and will be more optimized for running the latest games.

The Opteron 8216 has 1 more core than the Athlon 64 FX-53. However, while the Opteron 8216 will probably perform better than the Athlon 64 FX-53, both CPUs are likely to struggle with the latest games, and will almost certainly bottleneck high-end graphics cards. Both CPUs also have quite low clock frequencies, which means recent games will have to be played at low settings, assuming you own an equivalently powerful GPU.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Opteron 8216 and Athlon 64 FX-53 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the Opteron 8216 and the Athlon 64 FX-53 both have the same clock frequency, this is by no means an indicator that the two CPUs will provide the same level of performance. As such, we need to look elsewhere for more reliable comparisons.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The Opteron 8216 and the Athlon 64 FX-53 have the same L2 cache size, and neither CPU appears to have an L3 cache. They even have the same L1 cache size, so are identical in terms of cache size.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Athlon 64 FX-53 has a 6 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Opteron 8216. However, the Opteron 8216 was created with a 40 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the Opteron 8216 is likely the CPU with the lower heat production and power requirements, by quite a wide margin.