AMD Opteron 252 vs AMD Opteron 248
Comparative analysis of AMD Opteron 252 and AMD Opteron 248 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) 3 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher clock speed: 2.6 GHz vs 2.2 GHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 90 nm vs 130 nm
- Around 60% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 760 vs 476
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | February 2005 vs November 2003 |
Maximum frequency | 2.6 GHz vs 2.2 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 476 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Opteron 248
- Around 3% lower typical power consumption: 89 Watt vs 92 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 89 Watt vs 92 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Opteron 252
CPU 2: AMD Opteron 248
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Opteron 252 | AMD Opteron 248 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 0 | 0 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 760 | 476 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Opteron 252 | AMD Opteron 248 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Troy | SledgeHammer |
Launch date | February 2005 | November 2003 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $63 | $12 |
Place in performance rating | 3328 | 3331 |
Price now | $63.36 | $99.95 |
Value for money (0-100) | 3.54 | 1.40 |
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 | 2.2 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 | 89 Watt |