I/O is the bottleneck at this point, and the HD is certainly the biggest part
of that. In some interesting stuff I have seen and/or discussed with folks,
trying to get a sense of the ultimate issues around x64, I remember talking
to someone who was doing some interesting tests with Terminal Services
deployments on x64. In order to make I/O not the bottleneck, they were
deploying with VERY wide RAID arrays. My memory is >30 disks wide. And
obviously, on SCSI and/or Fiber.
For memory, both architectures come at it in a different way, AMD with a
better connection technology and Intel with bigger cache. The results are
essentially similar, from what I've seen, though I admit I have a personal
preference for the AMD solution with HyperTransport, since I see some
interesting possibilities with 4 and 8 way NUMA type connectivity.
The thing to keep in mind with any of this is that whatever you do will be
outdated before you receive it. But that trying to solve a problem with speed
of any individual component alone is a futile battle. Which is why dual core
is interesting -- it lets real parallelism happen. So looking for solutions
that let you accomplish the same kinds of parallelism in other areas, such as
RAID arrays. Here SCSI has definite advantages. But at a pretty expensive
cost, obviously. Building a 200 GB 0+1 RAID array with, say, 18GB or even
36GB SCSI disks is an interesting challenge. But that's what it takes to get
around disk being the bottleneck.
Tony Sperling wrote:
> Dear group!
> So, 64-bit has landed - the OS ramifications are clearing up, what
> can we expect next? Personally, I am at least a bit exhilarated with
> my Athlon 64, but I am also quite a bit disappointed with the system
> at the same time. I'm to blame for that. Now dual-core is on the
> threshold and I am saving up for what looks to be 'the real thing'
> and I am wondering if the knowledgeable people here can make educated
> guesses about what will happen with (should I say 'the sub-systems?)
> things like memory and Hard-Disks. Clearly, if you can double the
> work from the processor (at the same clock-speed) memory will have a
> hard time keeping up (currently mine is pc3200) and S-ATA1 too will
> be panting in the dust. S-ATA2 doesn't look as though it will benefit
> the home user much unless RAID'ed, the way things are looking I may
> well be out shoping before XP64 hits the shops in my area and I would
> love not having to rely solely on the average sales-people.
> So, what is happening behind the scenes? What will that really
> powerful dual-core system look like? Who will be first? And who is
> likely to build an early, stable and well supported system?
> I have no inclination to bust my account to pay for a system full of
> apparant bottlenecks, and I do not ask for anybody to put their head
> in the Guillotine with this, but some has to be more well informed
> than the rest of us.
> Regards, Tony. . .