Itanium 9310 vs Celeron 2.0
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | Northwood (2002−2004) | no data |
| Release date | September 2002 (22 years ago) | 1 January 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 8 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 10 MB L3 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 146 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 55 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | 478 | FCLGA1248 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | + |
| PAE | no data | 50 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 130 Watt |
Celeron 2.0 has 78.1% lower power consumption.
Itanium 9310, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron 2.0 is a desktop processor while Itanium 9310 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2.0 and Itanium 9310, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
