Celeron 2.10 vs Opteron 4376 HE
Aggregate performance score
Opteron 4376 HE outperforms Celeron 2.10 by a whopping 1650% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1969 | 3595 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 4.04 | 0.21 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Seoul (2012) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | 4 December 2012 (13 years ago) | November 2002 (23 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Opteron 4376 HE and Celeron 2.10 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 8 KB |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 128 KB |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 146 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 55 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 4376 HE and Celeron 2.10 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | C32 | 478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 73 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 4376 HE and Celeron 2.10. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 4376 HE and Celeron 2.10 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 4376 HE and Celeron 2.10. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR1, DDR2 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.45 | 0.14 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 73 Watt |
Opteron 4376 HE has a 1650% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 12.3% lower power consumption.
The AMD Opteron 4376 HE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 2.10 in performance tests.
Be aware that Opteron 4376 HE is a server/workstation processor while Celeron 2.10 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
