Xeon 3.20 vs Opteron 248

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Opteron 248
2003
1 core / 1 thread, 89 Watt
0.30
Xeon 3.20
2003
1 core / 1 thread, 97 Watt
0.30

Primary details

Comparing Opteron 248 and Xeon 3.20 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31013099
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency0.320.29
Architecture codenameSledgeHammer (2003−2005)Gallatin (2003−2004)
Release dateNovember 2003 (21 year ago)October 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$12no data

Detailed specifications

Opteron 248 and Xeon 3.20 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB8 KB
L2 cache1 MB512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography130 nm130 nm
Die size193 mm2237 mm2
Number of transistors106 million286 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Opteron 248 and Xeon 3.20 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 configuration22
Socket940604
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt97 Watt

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Opteron 248 0.30
Xeon 3.20 0.30

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Opteron 248 476
Xeon 3.20 478
+0.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 97 Watt

Opteron 248 has 9% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Opteron 248 and Xeon 3.20.


Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 248 and Xeon 3.20, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Opteron 248
Opteron 248
Intel Xeon 3.20
Xeon 3.20

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Opteron 248 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 6 votes

Rate Xeon 3.20 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Opteron 248 or Xeon 3.20, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.