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 Core i5 2400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2400

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 2.2 GHz More than 40% higher clock speed
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better geekbench 3 single core score 2,638 vs 887 Around 3x better geekbench 3 single core score
More l3 cache 6 MB vs 1 MB 6x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 8.14 pt/W vs 0.57 pt/W Around 14.2x better performance per watt
Significantly better PassMark score 5,901 vs 1,415 Around 4.2x better PassMark score
Significantly more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 3x more l3 cache per core
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 72.6 °C vs 55 °C More than 30% higher Maximum operating temperature
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Aug, 2006 Release date over 4 years later
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.54 GHz vs 2.84 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.51 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 2214

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 2214

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
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 93.6W Around 20% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year vs 27.75 $/year Around 20% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year vs 100.92 $/year Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 2400 vs Opteron 2214

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

Core i5 2400
2,260,000 MB/s
Opteron 2214
59.8 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

Core i5 2400
10,769
Opteron 2214
2,322

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 2400  vs
Opteron 2214 
Clock speed 3.1 GHz 2.2 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 1155
F
Is unlocked No No

features

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

power consumption

TDP 95W 95W
Annual home energy cost 27.75 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 100.92 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 8.14 pt/W 0.57 pt/W
Typical power consumption 93.6W 77.19W

details

Core i5 2400  vs
Opteron 2214 
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 1 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 90 nm
Max CPUs 1 2
Clock multiplier 31 11
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.6°C 0 - 55°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.54 GHz 2.84 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.51 GHz 2.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.54 GHz 2.84 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 2000 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 850 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz N/A
Intel Core i5 2400
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 2214
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus