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?

 
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2007
Hi all,
This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.

I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
performance. I am choosing between:

- dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
DDR SDRAM.

or

- single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHz
FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.

Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.

I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software, running
multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
inside them.

Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you prefer,
and why?

Ta,
Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
whome
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2007

"Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi all,
> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
>
> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
> performance. I am choosing between:
>
> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
> DDR SDRAM.
>
> or
>
> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHz
> FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>
> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>
> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software,
> running
> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
> inside them.
>
> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
> prefer,
> and why?
>
> Ta,
> Allistar.



Dunno, all I heard was that the new Intel chips whup AMD hands down.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dianthus Mimulus
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:10:41 +1300, Allistar wrote:

> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHz
> FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>
> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>
> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software, running
> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
> inside them.
>
> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you prefer,
> and why?


AMD - cooler, less electricity, and two sockets which means possibly
upgrading the chips to 8 or even 16 cores if the same socket is usable
down the track when AMD releases 4/8 core chips.

Also, AMD has a history of producing solid CPUs. Intel produced the
P4/heater soly for producing faster clock speeds.


--
Dianthus Mimulus

Microsoft's business practises exposed in court:
http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/full...#_Toc447960918
 
Reply With Quote
 
Craig Sutton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007

"Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi all,
> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
>
> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
> performance. I am choosing between:
>
> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
> DDR SDRAM.
>
> or
>
> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHz
> FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>
> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>
> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software,
> running
> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
> inside them.
>
> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
> prefer,
> and why?
>


If you simply want outrageous grunt get a good overclocking m.b and ram and
you will get 3.5ghz easy on air.

Have a look here what can be done with the 6800
http://www.nordichardware.com/Reviews/?skrivelse=487
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=465

some other links here
http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=int...ient=firefox-a

 
Reply With Quote
 
./
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
Allistar wrote:
> Hi all,
> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
>
> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
> performance. I am choosing between:
>
> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
> DDR SDRAM.
>
> or
>
> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHz
> FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>
> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>
> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software, running
> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
> inside them.
>
> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you prefer,
> and why?
>
> Ta,
> Allistar.


The one Gentoo supports best. I suspect for what you want AMD.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
Blue wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:10:41 +1300, Allistar wrote:
>
>> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
>> prefer, and why?

>
> Intel, more cores, thus more raw power, and other people seem to rave this
> way.


Even though both options have 4 cores (albeit the Intel offering has them
all on one CPU).

My concern with both options is that the Opteron seems to be an end of line
product now that the new Socket F's are coming out, and the Intel quad core
seems to be a beginning of line product - it's the first of it's kind.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
Craig Sutton wrote:

>
> "Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi all,
>> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
>>
>> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
>> performance. I am choosing between:
>>
>> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
>> DDR SDRAM.
>>
>> or
>>
>> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz,
>> 1066MHz FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>>
>> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
>> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>>
>> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software,
>> running
>> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
>> inside them.
>>
>> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
>> prefer,
>> and why?
>>

>
> If you simply want outrageous grunt get a good overclocking m.b and ram
> and you will get 3.5ghz easy on air.
>
> Have a look here what can be done with the 6800
> http://www.nordichardware.com/Reviews/?skrivelse=487
> http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=465
>
> some other links here
>

http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=int...ient=firefox-a

It's amazing what some people are willing to do to up the clock speed.

The 6800 is still only dual core. I've seen examples of overclocking the
quad core qx6700, but I'm not sure I'm game enough to risk frying a $1900
processor!

I'm still keen on 4 cores, and want the best overall performance. I prefer
AMD because their architecture seems better, but it seems the Socket 940
Opteron design is being superceded by the Socket F.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Allistar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
whome wrote:

>
> "Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi all,
>> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
>>
>> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
>> performance. I am choosing between:
>>
>> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
>> DDR SDRAM.
>>
>> or
>>
>> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz,
>> 1066MHz FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
>>
>> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
>> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
>>
>> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software,
>> running
>> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
>> inside them.
>>
>> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
>> prefer,
>> and why?
>>
>> Ta,
>> Allistar.

>
>
> Dunno, all I heard was that the new Intel chips whup AMD hands down.


I've decided to go with the Intel quad core. From all of the reviews I've
read the Intel quad core outperforms a dual cpu, dual core opteron in most
tests. My concerns are of power, heat and performance. I think with the
system I've put together it should perform quite well for the next few
years at least.

Another question: The m/b has a 1066MHz FSB. Do I need to match the DDR2
memory speed to that to get optimal performance? I can get 2x2Gb 1066MHz
DDR2 SDRAM chips, but could fit more in for the same dollars if the speed
was less.

Allistar.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Craig Sutton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007

"Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ...

> Another question: The m/b has a 1066MHz FSB. Do I need to match the DDR2
> memory speed to that to get optimal performance? I can get 2x2Gb 1066MHz
> DDR2 SDRAM chips, but could fit more in for the same dollars if the speed
> was less.
>


Not sure but I think dual DDR kits work best only using 2 sticks. You can
have trouble with some m.b if you fill all the ram slots.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Dave Doe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-22-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
says...
> whome wrote:
>
> >
> > "Allistar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hi all,
> >> This is a followup to the "Hard disk died!" message I send yesterday.
> >>
> >> I'm no closer to deciding which architecture to go with in terms of
> >> performance. I am choosing between:
> >>
> >> - dual processor, dual core AMD Opteron 2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2GbMHz 400MHz
> >> DDR SDRAM.
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> - single processor, quad core Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800, 2.93GHz,
> >> 1066MHz FSB, 2Gb 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
> >>
> >> Given the architectural differences, I'd say they're pretty much evenly
> >> paced - the AMD will be cooler and consume less power, which is a bonus.
> >>
> >> I want raw performance for running Gentoo Linux, compiling software,
> >> running
> >> multiple virtual machines inside VMWare Workstation with heavy processes
> >> inside them.
> >>
> >> Assume for a minute that cost isn't an issue, which setup would you
> >> prefer,
> >> and why?
> >>
> >> Ta,
> >> Allistar.

> >
> >
> > Dunno, all I heard was that the new Intel chips whup AMD hands down.

>
> I've decided to go with the Intel quad core. From all of the reviews I've
> read the Intel quad core outperforms a dual cpu, dual core opteron in most
> tests. My concerns are of power, heat and performance. I think with the
> system I've put together it should perform quite well for the next few
> years at least.
>
> Another question: The m/b has a 1066MHz FSB. Do I need to match the DDR2
> memory speed to that to get optimal performance? I can get 2x2Gb 1066MHz
> DDR2 SDRAM chips, but could fit more in for the same dollars if the speed
> was less.


I would *guess* so - try out some 'cheaper' RAM vs Corsair, I bet only
the Corsair handles it. It's not cheap though I'm sure your
supplier will let you put it to the test though.

--
Duncan
 
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