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 2500K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2500K

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
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better geekbench 3 single core score 2,994 vs 1,214 Around 2.5x 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 overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.98 GHz vs 3.27 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better performance per watt 6.79 pt/W vs 1.36 pt/W Around 5x better performance per watt
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, 2007 Release date over 3 years later
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 9,382 vs 8,373 More than 10% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.88 GHz vs 3.2 GHz Around 55% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Opteron 8224 SE

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 8224 SE

Report a correction
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 8 vs 1 7 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration
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
Lower typical power consumption 96.69W vs 112.55W Around 15% lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual home energy cost 28.67 $/year vs 41.29 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 104.24 $/year vs 110.03 $/year More than 5% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 2500K vs Opteron 8224 SE

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 2500K
2,530,000 MB/s
Opteron 8224 SE
87,500 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 2500K  vs
Opteron 8224 SE 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.2 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 1155
F
Is unlocked Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 119W
Annual home energy cost 41.29 $/year 28.67 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 110.03 $/year 104.24 $/year
Performance per watt 6.79 pt/W 1.36 pt/W
Typical power consumption 112.55W 96.69W

details

Core i5 2500K  vs
Opteron 8224 SE 
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 8
Clock multiplier 33 16
Voltage range 1.2 - 1.5V 1.32 - UnknownV
Operating temperature 5 - 72.6°C 0 - 55°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.98 GHz 3.27 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.88 GHz 3.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.98 GHz 3.27 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 N/A
Latest DirectX 10.1 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 850 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz N/A
3DMark06 5,275 N/A
Intel Core i5 2500K
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 8224 SE
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus