AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz specs.
CPU Processors Specs >> AMD >> AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz| Specifications | | | Reviews |
General Information AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz
Manufacturer Part Number:
OSB244FOT5BLE
Brand Name:
AMD
Product Line:
Opteron
Product Model:
244 EE
Technical Information AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz
Processor Manufacturer:
AMD
Processor Core:
Dual-core (2 Core)
Clock Speed:
1.80 GHz
L1 Cache:
256 KB
L2 Cache:
2 MB
Processor Technology:
Virtualization Technology, HyperTransport Technology
Processor Socket:
Socket PGA-940
Miscellaneous AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz
Additional Information:
Integrated Memory Controller Type: Yes 128-bit ECC, Memory Interface: Dual 64/72 DDR Registered DIMMs ECC & Chip Kill, Hyper Transport: Three 16-lane@1GHz Full Duplex,
Platform Supported:
PC
Reviews, Questions about AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz
Write Review / Ask a question about AMD Opteron Dual-Core 244 EE 1.8 GHz
Popular today
AMD Opteron Dual-core 8220 2.80 GHz
Manufacturer Part Number: OSA8220CRWOF; Brand Name: AMD; Product Line: Opteron; Product Model: 8220; Packaged Quantity: 1; Processor Manufacturer: AMD; Processor Core: Dual-core (2 Core); Clock Speed:...
Intel Xeon MP Beckton
Socket: LGA1567; Core: Beckton; Number of cores: 6; Process Technology: 45 nm; Clock frequency: 2000 MHz; System bus: QPI; The multiplication factor: 15; The core voltage: 0.675 V; The amount of L2 ca...
New details about the upcoming MediaTek Dimensity 9500 flagship processor have appeared online. According to the latest information, the chip will have an increased frequency and will be on par with the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite 2 in terms of technical specifications.
AMD has announced the start date and prices of Threadripper PRO 9000 series processors. The list of new products includes five models with different specifications, which, as expected, will cost a decent amount of money.
The results of testing of Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX mobile chip have appeared in the network, which showed unexpected results in comparison with its ?big brother?. In the PassMark benchmark it outperformed its desktop version in terms of performance.