From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 24 22:34:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B8F16A41F for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:34:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from r.mahoney@iconz.co.nz) Received: from frigg.iconz.co.nz (etrn.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C442943D48 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:34:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from r.mahoney@iconz.co.nz) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frigg.iconz.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA902106A; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:34:41 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from frigg.iconz.co.nz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (frigg [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31419-17; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:34:36 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from 192.168.1.3 (firewall.indica-et-buddhica.org [210.48.84.26]) by frigg.iconz.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9186D2099E; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:19:45 +1300 (NZDT) From: Richard MAHONEY To: Ken Gunderson In-Reply-To: <20060124110334.40e81208.kgunders@teamcool.net> References: <20060124110334.40e81208.kgunders@teamcool.net> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1138141170.10892.2.camel@proliant> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.324 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:19:30 +1300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at frigg.iconz.co.nz Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dual vs single core opteron 100's X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:34:45 -0000 On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 07:03, Ken Gunderson wrote: > Greets Everyone: > > I was getting into a discussion the other day about this and decided to > see what the FBSD amd64 gurus had to say about it. Given approximately > equal cost of, for example, a single core Opteron150 (2.4GHz) and a > dual core Opteron165 (1.8GHz) under what kind of situations would > one be preferred over the other? > > fwiw- my friend asserts it will ALWAYS be the faster single core because > of context switches and dual cores are optimized for highly multi- > threaded OS's (e.g. WInblows). But 1) I think the scheduler has been > improved in 6.0, and 2) he's a linuxer. For Sun's take on the advantages of multi-core CPUs you might like to look at what they have to say about the T2000: http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t2000/ Best, Richard MAHONEY -- Richard MAHONEY | internet: http://indica-et-buddhica.org Littledene | telephone/telefax (man.): ++64 3 312 1699 Bay Road | cellular: ++64 27 482 9986 OXFORD, NZ | e-mail: r.mahoney[use"@"]iconz.co.nz