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 G1610T

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron G1610T

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 52.81W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score 1,710 vs 900 90% better geekbench 3 single core score
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 15.66 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 56.94 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Jan, 2013 vs Mar, 2012 Release date 10 months later
Front view of AMD Opteron 3280

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 3280

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 2 MB 4x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 2 6 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better performance per watt 10.33 pt/W vs 3.69 pt/W More than 2.8x better performance per watt
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
More threads 8 vs 2 6 more threads
Better PassMark score 5,330 vs 2,322 More than 2.2x better PassMark score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.87 GHz vs 2.44 GHz Around 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron G1610T vs Opteron 3280

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 G1610T
119,750 MB/s
Opteron 3280
1,710,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron G1610T  vs
Opteron 3280 
Clock speed 2.3 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Dual core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 1155
AM3+

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES

power consumption

TDP 35W 65W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 3.69 pt/W 10.33 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 52.81W

bus

Architecture DMI HyperTransport 3.0

details

Celeron G1610T  vs
Opteron 3280 
Threads 2 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 2 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 23 12

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.44 GHz 2.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.3 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.44 GHz 2.87 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 650 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3
Intel Celeron G1610T
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 3280
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus