Intel Itanium 9540 vs Core2 Duo E6305 |
Released November, 2012
Intel Itanium 9540
- 2.13 GHz
- Octa core
Reasons to buy the Intel Itanium 9540
 | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | | Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm |
| | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 8 | | Higher clock speed 2.13 GHz |
VS
Announced September, 2013
Intel Core2 Duo E6305
- 1.86 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Core2 Duo E6305
| | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W | | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
| | Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year | | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 2 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much newer manufacturing process | 32 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 8 | vs | 1 | 7 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Higher clock speed | 2.13 GHz | vs | 1.86 GHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
| More threads | 16 | vs | 2 | 14 more threads | |||
| More cores | 8 | vs | 2 | 6 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
| |||||||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 138.13W | 2.6x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 40.95 $/year | 2.6x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 148.92 $/year | 2.6x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Itanium 9540 vs Core2 Duo E6305
clock speed
L2 cache
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Itanium 9540 | vs | Core2 Duo E6305 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 1.86 GHz | |
| Cores | Octa core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 1248 | |||
| LGA 771 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 170W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 40.95 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 148.92 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 138.13W | 52.81W | |
details | Itanium 9540 | vs | Core2 Duo E6305 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 16 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 32 nm | 65 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 8 | 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 | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | QPI | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 3,200 MHz | 1,066 MHz | |
 Intel Itanium 9540  Report a correction |  Intel Core2 Duo E6305 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $2,650 | $3,838 | |
| Intel Itanium 9540 vs 9350 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2,650 | $305 | |
| Intel Itanium 9540 vs Core i7 4790 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2,650 | $1,443 | |
| Intel Itanium 9540 vs Xeon X5570 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $2,650 | $3,900 | |
| Intel Itanium 9540 vs Xeon E5-4650 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | ||
| Intel Core2 Duo E6305 vs Core i3 3227U | ||
| | VS |  |
| Intel Core2 Duo E6305 vs E6405 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $522 | ||
| Intel Core2 Duo E6305 vs Pentium P6200 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| Intel Celeron 847 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i5 6600K vs i7 6700K | ||
