Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New SMP build

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    That's all well and good, but op is considering building a dual quad core processor system, and since Intel has its FSB and AMD has HT, HT wins hands down as far as bandwidth is concerned. That advantage could change depending on intended workload, but until Intel releases Nehalem with quickpath, they can't compete on multiprocessor systems where lots of data needs to be shared.

    Comment


    • #12
      So here is a nice benchmark with an OC Q6600:

      http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...63-22205-28735 m

      Compared against Phenom - this time the values are more logical...

      Comment


      • #13
        Unfortunately, none of the PTS tests are of much relevance when we start talking server use that would exploit SMP systems and show the bottlenecks that FSB has. Start getting some VM / SQL / apache and the likes tests in there and then you could potentially start seeing the difference.

        Comment


        • #14
          Thanks for the many replies.

          Hmm, I'm wondering now if I should hold out to Nehalem - according to this Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture) it's a big a change of architecture as the PPro was. If that's true, it's very significant.

          I'd totally forgotten that Intel still doesn't use point to point communication - yet.

          I may have to go back and investigate an AMD option based on the comments here

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by fluffy_bunny View Post
            Thanks for the many replies.

            Hmm, I'm wondering now if I should hold out to Nehalem - according to this Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture) it's a big a change of architecture as the PPro was. If that's true, it's very significant.

            I'd totally forgotten that Intel still doesn't use point to point communication - yet.

            I may have to go back and investigate an AMD option based on the comments here
            Until AMD has their answer to Nehalem you can be guaranteed that intel will price those at insane dollars.

            Comment


            • #16
              well... from these results:
              http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...588-5507-25823
              one can certainly conclude, that if one is going for a 7zip box, intel is the way to go, but for openssl performance, amd is the way to go.

              Comment


              • #17
                Sigh, I'm tired of comparing apples to oranges. I'd like to see a Phenom 9750 against a Q6600 (at stock speed, which is 2.4GHz for both) and/or a Phenom 9850 against a Q9300 (both 2.5GHz).

                Comment


                • #18
                  Why not OC the Phenom

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I don't see the point in overclocking when the goal is to compare two competing products. Besides, the Phenom doesn't overclock as well as Intel CPUs, and few people overclock their processors in the first place. Moreover, it requires somewhat expensive equipment (high-end motherboard, third-party cooler, etc…), and it's not exactly simple. When I see the comments on hardware articles, I get the feeling people who read them only care about overclocking their systems… Me, I want to run my CPU at stock speeds and use Cool N' Quiet/SpeedStep, in a reasonably quiet PC. Too bad my motherboard doesn't lower voltages when throttling the CPU's frequency (I've mailed Gigabyte about this, I'm still waiting for an answer).

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      I use stock Intel cooler for 2.4 -> 3.2 with E6600, standard P35 Gigabyte board - not the cheapest, but not "highend" like X48 or so. What board do you use and which cpu?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X