AMD Opteron 148 vs AMD Opteron 144
Comparative analysis of AMD Opteron 148 and AMD Opteron 144 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Compatibility. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Opteron 148
- CPU is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- Around 22% higher clock speed: 2.2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz
- Around 18% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 443 vs 376
- Around 24% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 392 vs 316
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | November 2003 vs September 2003 |
| Maximum frequency | 2.2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 443 vs 376 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 392 vs 316 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Opteron 144
- Around 9% lower typical power consumption: 82 Watt vs 89 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 82 Watt vs 89 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Opteron 148
CPU 2: AMD Opteron 144
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Opteron 148 | AMD Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 443 | 376 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 392 | 316 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Opteron 148 | AMD Opteron 144 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer | SledgeHammer |
| Launch date | November 2003 | September 2003 |
| Place in performance rating | 3091 | 3182 |
| Vertical segment | Server | Server |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $65 | |
| Price now | $65 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 2.20 | |
Performance |
||
| 64 bit support | ||
| Die size | 193 mm | 193 mm |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB | 1024 KB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Maximum frequency | 2.2 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Number of cores | 1 | 1 |
| Transistor count | 106 million | 106 million |
Compatibility |
||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Sockets supported | 940 | 940 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 89 Watt | 82 Watt |
