Intel Pentium D 805 vs Itanium 9350 |
Released January, 2005
Intel Pentium D 805
- 2.66 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium D 805
 | Significantly higher clock speed 2.66 GHz | | Much lower typical power consumption 77.19W |
| | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core | | Much lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year |
VS
Released February, 2010
Intel Itanium 9350
- 1.73 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Itanium 9350
| | Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 8 | | Much newer manufacturing process 65 nm |
| | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | | Has virtualization support Yes |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 2.66 GHz | vs | 1.73 GHz | Around 55% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 150.31W | Around 50% 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 | 22.89 $/year | vs | 44.57 $/year | Around 50% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 162.06 $/year | Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | 8 | vs | 1 | 7 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 65 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| 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 virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
| More threads | 8 | vs | 2 | 6 more threads | |||
| Newer | Feb, 2010 | vs | Jan, 2005 | Release date over 5 years later | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Pentium D 805 vs Itanium 9350
clock speed
L2 cache
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium D 805 | vs | Itanium 9350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 1.73 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| LGA 1248 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | No | Yes | |
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | No | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 95W | 185W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 44.57 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 162.06 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 77.19W | 150.31W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | QPI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 533 MHz | 2,400 MHz | |
details | Pentium D 805 | vs | Itanium 9350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 8 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 90 nm | 65 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 8 | |
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 Pentium D 805  Report a correction |  Intel Itanium 9350 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $93 | $68 | |
| 805 vs 531 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | $67 | |
| 805 vs E2140 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | ||
| 805 vs E6300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | ||
| 805 vs 631 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | ||
| 805 vs 6110 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | ||
| 805 vs 600e | ||
| | VS |  |
| $93 | ||
| 805 vs 347 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
