From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 21 12:07:37 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F8D16A419 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:07:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from ns.trinitel.com (186.161.36.72.static.reverse.ltdomains.com [72.36.161.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E986613C4A7 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:07:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from proton.storspeed.com (209-163-168-124.static.twtelecom.net [209.163.168.124]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns.trinitel.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8LBeSZ0084153; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 06:40:29 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <46F3ADAA.6080208@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 06:40:26 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Decibel!" References: <1F219879A7E5C565C96109FF@c-2f56e155.1521-1-64736c12.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se> <57EF86A6-6062-4F1A-959E-41ABABD3F0CF@decibel.org> In-Reply-To: <57EF86A6-6062-4F1A-959E-41ABABD3F0CF@decibel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on ns.trinitel.com Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Palle Girgensohn , Francisco Reyes Subject: Re: AMD or Intel? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:07:37 -0000 Decibel! wrote: > On Sep 13, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Palle Girgensohn wrote: >> --On torsdag, torsdag 13 sep 2007 15.07.17 -0400 Francisco Reyes >> wrote: >> >>> Palle Girgensohn writes: >>> >>>> Now, I hear rumors that AMD is to be preferred over Intel for >>>> performance >>> >>> From what I have read in the past, specially in the postgresql list, it >>> seems the AMD64 cpus do better with Postgresql. Possibly because of >>> better bus architecture. >> >> I think this is not current information; the new woodcrest >> architecture performs mucg better, although this is deduced from this >> thread's discussion... > > Except this thread has largely glossed over the importance of memory > bandwidth, which is exactly the reason why Opterons have been beating > Xeons for several years. Last I'd heard, things were fairly close > between the two, but that would matter on how many cores and physical > CPUs you have. This is still true, even with the latest Intel Cores. For stuff that does massive memory work, AMD's seem to be faster. However, for non-memory intensive applications, the Intel procs are smokin' fast. > It would be good if someone could do a database benchmark for some of > the larger parts. > > Something else worth mentioning... a lot of work is being done to > improve PostgreSQL scalability for larger numbers of CPUs. If you're > looking at anything over 4 cores, I recommend going to 8.3 ASAP. Hmm. Sounds like you know a lot about database stuff (database architect!), maybe you would be a perfect candidate for the benchmark? :) Blue Skies! Eric