AMD Opteron 152 vs AMD Opteron 254
Comparative analysis of AMD Opteron 152 and AMD Opteron 254 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 254
- Around 8% higher clock speed: 2.8 GHz vs 2.6 GHz
- Around 13% lower typical power consumption: 92 Watt vs 104 Watt
- Around 19% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 578 vs 487
- Around 5% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 451 vs 428
Specifications (specs) | |
Maximum frequency | 2.8 GHz vs 2.6 GHz |
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 2 vs 1 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 92 Watt vs 104 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - Single thread mark | 578 vs 487 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 451 vs 428 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Opteron 152
CPU 2: AMD Opteron 254
PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Opteron 152 | AMD Opteron 254 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 487 | 578 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 428 | 451 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Opteron 152 | AMD Opteron 254 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Venus | Troy |
Launch date | August 2005 | August 2005 |
Place in performance rating | 3027 | 2870 |
Vertical segment | Server | Server |
Performance |
||
64 bit support | ||
L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
L2 cache | 1024 KB | 1024 KB |
Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm | 90 nm |
Maximum frequency | 2.6 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
Number of cores | 1 | 1 |
Transistor count | 106 million | 106 million |
Compatibility |
||
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 2 |
Sockets supported | 939 | 940 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 104 Watt | 92 Watt |