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

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 130 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher clock speed 2.6 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Significantly lower typical power consumption 44.69W vs 72.31W Around 40% lower typical power consumption
Newer Jan, 2013 vs Nov, 2003 Release date over 9 years later
Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score 1,970 vs 972 More than 2x better geekbench 3 single core score
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 3,499 vs 958 Around 3.8x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.69 GHz vs 2.4 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year vs 21.44 $/year Around 40% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year vs 77.96 $/year Around 40% lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 1.96 pt/W vs 1.15 pt/W More than 70% better performance per watt
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.68 GHz vs 2.2 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 848

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 848

Report a correction
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 8 vs 1 7 supports more 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 848

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 848
123,000 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron G1610  vs
Opteron 848 
Clock speed 2.6 GHz 2.2 GHz
Cores Dual core Single 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 848 
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 130 nm
Max CPUs 1 8
Clock multiplier 26 11

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.69 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.68 GHz 2.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.69 GHz 2.4 GHz

power consumption

TDP 55W 89W
Annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year 21.44 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year 77.96 $/year
Performance per watt 1.96 pt/W 1.15 pt/W
Typical power consumption 44.69W 72.31W
Intel Celeron G1610
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 848
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus