Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Will Intel or AMD give me better performance?

Reply
Thread Tools

Will Intel or AMD give me better performance?

 
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-24-2007
Dianthus Mimulus wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 07:02:00 +1300, thingy wrote:
>
>> We are running 8 gig in our blades and have run out of ram before
>> consuming more than 10% of the CPU GHz....so we are upgrading to 16
>> Gig....that will allow 14 server instances per blade....so you could
>> probably downgrade the CPU slightly and get more ram instead.

>
> <grin>
>
> So you'll probably get 20% of CPU utilisation. )


and thats with dual core 3Ghz cpus....we can now buy 2.66Ghz quad core
cpus....so instead of 4 x 3ghz - vmware overhead == 11Ghz available CPU
we now have 2.66 x 8....so about 22Ghz available....mind boggling...

> What I think I hear you saying is that RAM in a server is more important
> that raw CPU speed.


Unless you are doing maths intensive work, generally yes.....store.exe
on exchange maybe a notable exception.....

>


The new quad core means that you get 22Ghz per box for your 2 cpu Vmware
licence fee. VMware also seem to have addressed the cpu hog issue in
2.x, in 3.x combined with the simply awsome processing power of the new
Quad cpus, it is not the biggest issue....now networking, disk i/o or
ram slots would seem more of an issue than CPU...This means that the 4
gig ram modules really need to drop in price by 75% (or more), then its
48 gig of ram per box....eg at present a Dell 2900 with 48Gig is three
times the price of one with 24gig, so it is cheaper to buy another box
and a vmware licence then get that extra 24gig of ram....loony.

We have been running Vmware for 4 months and are way impressed...

regards

Thing

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-25-2007
Allistar wrote:
> ~misfit~ wrote:
> > Sorry Allistar, I can't really answer that. I haven't built a new
> > machine for a couple years and am a bit out-of-touch with current
> > technology.

>
> I'm finding the same thing. The last time I hand picked hardware for
> a box was a PIII-400 - things are a bit different these days.


My last build was an Athlon 64 but I didn't get to play with it much. It
worked fine and the guy wanted it then so out it went.

Previous to that I built a few Bartons, this machine included. Haven't done
an Intel since Tualatins.

> > All I can say is that the faster the RAM the better. However, there
> > comes a point where there are diminishing returns for your dollar.
> > Only you can pick where on that curve you choose to buy.

>
> Thanks for the advice, I appreciate it.


You're welcome. Sorry I couldn't give you more.

> I've reached the ceiling
> price on what my marital unit will allow, and although I've like 4Gb
> I think I'll stick with 2 for now.


2GB of RAM is a lot, relatively speaking. I've read that you intend to do a
lot more with your machine than I am doing but I have 2GB in this machine.
(Barton XP2500+, currently underclocked CPU [1.6GHz] but overclocked FSB
[200 real MHz] and vastly reduced vcore [1.25V]. It's fine for my current
requirements and apparently, according to an on-line calculator, at this
setting the CPU is only pulling 34 watts at 100% load. If I need to it'll do
2.2GHz easy but use more power) I have a wee proggy that shows unused RAM in
the systray and it never goes below 1000MB, usually sits around 1.4GB free.
That's running XP Pro SP2 with lots of processes running. (Just checked via
ctrl-alt-del and there are 48 processes running).

Have fun with your new machine. I envy you.
--
Shaun.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
~misfit~ wrote:

> Allistar wrote:
>> ~misfit~ wrote:
>> > Sorry Allistar, I can't really answer that. I haven't built a new
>> > machine for a couple years and am a bit out-of-touch with current
>> > technology.

>>
>> I'm finding the same thing. The last time I hand picked hardware for
>> a box was a PIII-400 - things are a bit different these days.

>
> My last build was an Athlon 64 but I didn't get to play with it much. It
> worked fine and the guy wanted it then so out it went.
>
> Previous to that I built a few Bartons, this machine included. Haven't
> done an Intel since Tualatins.
>
>> > All I can say is that the faster the RAM the better. However, there
>> > comes a point where there are diminishing returns for your dollar.
>> > Only you can pick where on that curve you choose to buy.

>>
>> Thanks for the advice, I appreciate it.

>
> You're welcome. Sorry I couldn't give you more.
>
>> I've reached the ceiling
>> price on what my marital unit will allow, and although I've like 4Gb
>> I think I'll stick with 2 for now.

>
> 2GB of RAM is a lot, relatively speaking. I've read that you intend to do
> a lot more with your machine than I am doing but I have 2GB in this
> machine. (Barton XP2500+, currently underclocked CPU [1.6GHz] but
> overclocked FSB
> [200 real MHz] and vastly reduced vcore [1.25V].


I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb should
just be enough for this before things start paging. 4Gb would have been
better but the budget doesn't allow that at the moment.

> It's fine for my current
> requirements and apparently, according to an on-line calculator, at this
> setting the CPU is only pulling 34 watts at 100% load. If I need to it'll
> do 2.2GHz easy but use more power) I have a wee proggy that shows unused
> RAM in the systray and it never goes below 1000MB, usually sits around
> 1.4GB free. That's running XP Pro SP2 with lots of processes running.
> (Just checked via ctrl-alt-del and there are 48 processes running).
>
> Have fun with your new machine. I envy you.


I've decided on the quad core QX6700 mainly because the Opteron socket F
CPU's aren't available in NZ yet. I don't see the point of buying 2 dual
core socket 940s as that appears to be an end of line technology. I would
love a dual, quad core Opteron 2218, but the timing isn't right. Maybe in a
few months time. Bang for buck I reckon the QX6700 is a good way to go. The
most complicated part of deciding on components is working out which power
supply to use. I hope to have it delivered in a couple of weeks - I let you
know how performance compares to my current P4 2.4GHz, 1Gb computer.

Cheers,
Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Allistar wrote:

> I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb should
> just be enough for this before things start paging. 4Gb would have been
> better but the budget doesn't allow that at the moment.


I assume you're going to build it as 64-bit code, to give yourself the
ability to use all available RAM.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Allistar
> wrote:
>
>> I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb
>> should just be enough for this before things start paging. 4Gb would have
>> been better but the budget doesn't allow that at the moment.

>
> I assume you're going to build it as 64-bit code, to give yourself the
> ability to use all available RAM.


Indeed I will. Every single piece of software on the thing will be compiled
as 64 bit.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dianthus Mimulus
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 00:12:20 +1300, Allistar wrote:

> I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb should
> just be enough for this before things start paging.


Surely it needs to be re-written so that the RAM-hogging problem is fixed.


--
Dianthus Mimulus

Microsoft's business practises exposed in court:
http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/full...#_Toc447960918
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rob S
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
Allistar wrote:
I hope to have it delivered in a couple of weeks - I let you
> know how performance compares to my current P4 2.4GHz, 1Gb computer.
>
> Cheers,
> Allistar.


Just out of curiosity, are you planning on splitting up your old setup
and selling as parts? I'd be interested in the cpu.

(You'd probably make more splitting up than selling as a complete unit.)
--

Rob
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://aspir8or.blogspot.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


BUFFERS=20 FILES=15 2nd down, 4th quarter, 5 yards to go!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
Dianthus Mimulus wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 00:12:20 +1300, Allistar wrote:
>
>> I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb
>> should just be enough for this before things start paging.

>
> Surely it needs to be re-written so that the RAM-hogging problem is fixed.


Heh. How do you store arrays containing over a billion floats and *not* use
a significant amount of memory?

Just because a process hogs RAM doesn't mean it's poorly designed.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
Rob S wrote:

> Allistar wrote:
> I hope to have it delivered in a couple of weeks - I let you
>> know how performance compares to my current P4 2.4GHz, 1Gb computer.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Allistar.

>
> Just out of curiosity, are you planning on splitting up your old setup
> and selling as parts? I'd be interested in the cpu.


I wasn't planning on it, but if I do I'll let you know.

> (You'd probably make more splitting up than selling as a complete unit.)


I'll probably leave it here and add it to my compile cluster, turning it on
only when needed.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
~misfit~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2007
Allistar wrote:
> ~misfit~ wrote:
> > 2GB of RAM is a lot, relatively speaking. I've read that you intend
> > to do a lot more with your machine than I am doing but I have 2GB
> > in this machine. (Barton XP2500+, currently underclocked CPU
> > [1.6GHz] but overclocked FSB
> > [200 real MHz] and vastly reduced vcore [1.25V].

>
> I'm developing a data analysis tool that is very RAM intensive, 2Gb
> should just be enough for this before things start paging. 4Gb would
> have been better but the budget doesn't allow that at the moment.


Yeah, I thought you might have need/use for more RAM than I. I only have 2GB
in this machine as I noticed that DDR was starting to get more expensive
than DDR2, as is always the case when a new generation of RAM comes out, so
I decided to buy more now. In fact I don't see much, if any improvement over
the 1GB that it had before I bought the extra GB.

If only I could get some 256 or 512MB SDRAM modules at the price new RAM
goes for... It would rejuvenate my Tualatins no end to give them more RAM.
They only have two slots each and I only have 128MB modules.

> > Have fun with your new machine. I envy you.

>
> I've decided on the quad core QX6700 mainly because the Opteron
> socket F CPU's aren't available in NZ yet. I don't see the point of
> buying 2 dual core socket 940s as that appears to be an end of line
> technology. I would love a dual, quad core Opteron 2218, but the
> timing isn't right. Maybe in a few months time. Bang for buck I
> reckon the QX6700 is a good way to go. The most complicated part of
> deciding on components is working out which power supply to use. I
> hope to have it delivered in a couple of weeks - I let you know how
> performance compares to my current P4 2.4GHz, 1Gb computer.


Cool, thanks. It sounds like you're going to have a really grunty (technical
term, heh!) machine on your hands.

Cheers,
--
Shaun.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMD Phenom II X2 550 and AMD Athlon II X2 250 Processors Review Ian Front Page News 0 06-02-2009 08:40 AM
A very good (for AMD/ATI) AMD's hdmi chipset... thingy NZ Computing 10 03-09-2008 02:20 AM
interesting comment on amd from the Inquirer...AMD RIP I wonder? thingy NZ Computing 23 12-02-2007 12:16 AM
Build a Better Blair (like Build a Better Bush, only better) Kenny Computer Support 0 05-06-2005 04:50 AM
AMD Sempron vs AMD Athlon Dalgibbard Computer Support 2 09-16-2004 06:40 PM



Advertisments