Intel Itanium 9130M vs Core2 Duo T9500 |
Released October, 2007
Intel Itanium 9130M
- 1.66 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Itanium 9130M
 | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 4 |
VS
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo T9500
- 2.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core2 Duo T9500
| | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm |
| | Significantly higher clock speed 2.6 GHz | | Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 4 | vs | 1 | 3 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 2 MB | 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 2.6 GHz | vs | 1.66 GHz | More than 55% higher clock speed | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 3x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 28.44W | vs | 84.5W | 3x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | vs | 25.05 $/year | 3x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | vs | 91.1 $/year | 3x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2008 | vs | Oct, 2007 | Release date 2 months later | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Itanium 9130M vs Core2 Duo T9500
clock speed
L2 cache
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Itanium 9130M | vs | Core2 Duo T9500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 2.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | No | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | No | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 104W | 35W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 25.05 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 91.1 $/year | 30.66 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 84.5W | 28.44W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 667 MHz | 800 MHz | |
details | Itanium 9130M | vs | Core2 Duo T9500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 6 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 3 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 90 nm | 45 nm | |
| Transistor count | 1,720,000,000 | 410,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 4 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | None | |
| Label | N/A | N/A | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| 3DMark06 | N/A | N/A | |
 Intel Itanium 9130M  Report a correction |  Intel Core2 Duo T9500 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $230 | $248 | |
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| AMD A12 7th Gen A12-9700P vs Intel Core i7 6700K | ||
