AMD Opteron 150 vs AMD Opteron 148
Comparative analysis of AMD Opteron 150 and AMD Opteron 148 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 150
- CPU is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher clock speed: 2.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 90 nm vs 130 nm
- Around 5% lower typical power consumption: 85 Watt vs 89 Watt
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 471 vs 443
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | August 2005 vs November 2003 |
Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm vs 130 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt vs 89 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - Single thread mark | 471 vs 443 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 393 vs 392 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Opteron 150
CPU 2: AMD Opteron 148
PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Opteron 150 | AMD Opteron 148 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 471 | 443 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 393 | 392 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Opteron 150 | AMD Opteron 148 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Venus | SledgeHammer |
Launch date | August 2005 | November 2003 |
Place in performance rating | 3041 | 3083 |
Vertical segment | Server | Server |
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 | 90 nm | 130 nm |
Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
Number of cores | 1 | 1 |
Transistor count | 106 million | 106 million |
Compatibility |
||
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
Sockets supported | 939 | 940 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | 89 Watt |