Intel Itanium 9150N vs Core i5 4278U |
Released October, 2007
Intel Itanium 9150N
- 1.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Itanium 9150N
 | Much more l3 cache per core 12 MB/core | | Much more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | Much more l3 cache 24 MB | | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 4 |
VS
Released July, 2014
Intel Core i5 4278U
- 2.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core i5 4278U
| | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Significantly higher clock speed 2.6 GHz |
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Much lower typical power consumption 22.75W |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l3 cache per core | 12 MB/core | vs | 1.5 MB/core | 8x more l3 cache per core | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much more l3 cache | 24 MB | vs | 3 MB | 8x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 4 | vs | 1 | 3 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 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 | 1.6 GHz | Around 65% higher clock speed | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 22.75W | vs | 84.5W | 3.7x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits | |||
| Newer | Jul, 2014 | vs | Oct, 2007 | Release date over 6 years later | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 6.75 $/year | vs | 25.05 $/year | 3.7x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 24.53 $/year | vs | 91.1 $/year | 3.7x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Itanium 9150N vs Core i5 4278U
clock speed
L2 cache
L3 cache
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Itanium 9150N | vs | Core i5 4278U |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 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 | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 104W | 28W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 25.05 $/year | 6.75 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 91.1 $/year | 24.53 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 84.5W | 22.75W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | DMI 2.0 | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | Itanium 9150N | vs | Core i5 4278U |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 3 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 12 MB/core | 1.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 90 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 4 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® Iris™ Graphics 5100 | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 200 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,100 MHz | |
 Intel Itanium 9150N  Report a correction |  Intel Core i5 4278U Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $315 | $315 | |
| 4278U vs 4260U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $315 | |
| 4278U vs 4258U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $315 | |
| 4278U vs 4308U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $315 | |
| 4278U vs 5257U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $130 | |
| 4278U vs 3210M | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $378 | |
| 4278U vs 3615QM | ||
| | VS |  |
| $315 | $426 | |
| 4278U vs 4578U | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
