Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:42:42 -0400 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> To: David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache Message-ID: <20060426104242.1209c152.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <17487.34074.833134.823847@canoe.dclg.ca> References: <20060425090739.8470143f.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <005301c668ab$39c4c150$8b00a8c0@multiplay.co.uk> <444E8F8A.9030409@rogers.com> <17487.34074.833134.823847@canoe.dclg.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:35:06 -0400 David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> wrote: > >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com> writes: > > Mike> Steven Hartland wrote: > >> Forget Intel and go for AMD who beat them hands down for DB work: > >> http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2745 > > Mike> It will be interesting to see how Intels new CPUs (Conroe, > Mike> Woodcrest, etc) will perform. From initial gaming benchmarks, > Mike> they seems to outperform the current AMD offerings. But for > Mike> current technology i agree, go for an Opteron system. > > This isn't random. As I understand the issue, the Opteron HT bus > handles synchronization much faster. So for a game --- this doesn't > matter ... games don't (usually) need sync. Databases, however, live > on synchonizaton. If you're a Dell man (and already paying the Dell > tax), consider the Sun 1U's. They offer up to 4 cores in a 1U. Lost me here. Are you saying 1U units from Sun? Or does Dell have a 1U called a "Sun"? I am pretty-much locked into Dell - decision made by others. Actually, I've been pretty happy with the Dell HW, but it's a shame they don't offer AMD servers. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060426104242.1209c152.wmoran>