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 Core2 Duo E8400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Duo E8400

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 1 MB 6x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 130 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,826 vs 859 More than 3.2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Significantly higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz More than 35% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 3x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz vs 2.8 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 69.31W Around 25% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,251 vs 682 Around 85% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Jan, 2008 vs May, 2004 Release date over 3 years later
Better PassMark score 2,160 vs 603 More than 3.5x better PassMark score
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.23 GHz vs 2.2 GHz More than 90% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Better performance per watt 1.83 pt/W vs 0.59 pt/W More than 3x better performance per watt
Lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 20.55 $/year Around 25% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 74.72 $/year Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Opteron 148

Reasons to consider the
AMD Opteron 148

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the AMD Opteron 148 vs the Intel Core2 Duo E8400.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs Opteron 148

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Duo E8400  vs
Opteron 148 
Clock speed 3 GHz 2.2 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
LGA 775
939
940

features

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

power consumption

TDP 65W 85.3W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 20.55 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 74.72 $/year
Performance per watt 1.83 pt/W 0.59 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 69.31W

details

Core2 Duo E8400  vs
Opteron 148 
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 6 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 130 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 9 11
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.36V 1.3 - UnknownV
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.4°C 0 - 71°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 125 0
Overclock review score 4.5 0
Overclocked clock speed 4.22 GHz 2.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.23 GHz 2.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz 2.8 GHz
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
Report a correction
AMD Opteron 148
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus