Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Celeron G1610

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron G1610

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron G1610

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron G1610

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly lower typical power consumption 44.69W vs 69.06W More than 35% lower typical power consumption
Newer Jan, 2013 vs Mar, 2006 Release date over 6 years later
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,397 vs 783 Around 80% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per watt 1.96 pt/W vs 0.79 pt/W Around 2.5x better performance per watt
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year vs 20.48 $/year More than 35% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year vs 74.46 $/year More than 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Opteron 285

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 285

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron G1610 vs Opteron 285

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron G1610
136,000 MB/s
Opteron 285
71.7 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron G1610  vs
Opteron 285 
Clock speed 2.6 GHz 2.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 1155
940

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

details

Celeron G1610  vs
Opteron 285 
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 90 nm
Max CPUs 1 2
Clock multiplier 26 13

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.69 GHz 2.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.68 GHz 2.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.69 GHz 2.6 GHz

power consumption

TDP 55W 85W
Annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year 20.48 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year 74.46 $/year
Performance per watt 1.96 pt/W 0.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 44.69W 69.06W
Intel Celeron G1610
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 285
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus