AMD Opteron 252 vs AMD Opteron 144
Comparative analysis of AMD Opteron 252 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 252
- CPU is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 44% higher clock speed: 2.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 90 nm vs 130 nm
- 2.4x better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 760 vs 316
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | February 2005 vs September 2003 |
| Maximum frequency | 2.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm vs 130 nm |
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 2 vs 1 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 760 vs 316 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Opteron 144
- Around 12% lower typical power consumption: 82 Watt vs 92 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 82 Watt vs 92 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Opteron 252
CPU 2: AMD Opteron 144
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Opteron 252 | AMD Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 0 | 376 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 760 | 316 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Opteron 252 | AMD Opteron 144 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture codename | Troy | SledgeHammer |
| Launch date | February 2005 | September 2003 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $63 | $65 |
| Place in performance rating | 3336 | 3182 |
| Price now | $63.36 | $65 |
| Value for money (0-100) | 3.54 | 2.20 |
| 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 | 130 nm |
| Maximum frequency | 2.6 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Number of cores | 1 | 1 |
| Transistor count | 106 million | 106 million |
| Die size | 193 mm | |
Compatibility |
||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 2 | 1 |
| Sockets supported | 940 | 940 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 92 Watt | 82 Watt |
