Slashdot Mirror
Opteron Benchmarked Against Xeon
jbmnuke writes "Tom's Hardware has posted a review of AMD's Opteron v. Intels Xeon." Nothing gets the blood pumping like a whole new generation of CPUs to compare numbers to, right? Update: 04/22 12:35 GMT by H : And there's the official benchmarks as well, with more coming - like Linux Magazine and Newsforge
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, these benchmarks are supposedly suggesting that Opterons excell at server-type operations, while workstation performance is lacking. However, if you check their benchmark setups, there seems to be another way of looking at this: isn't is so that Opterons simply run better on Linux rather than Windows?
"Man in the Moon and other weird things" - wfmh.org.pl/thorgal/Moon/
I know AMD is planning a "home" version this September, but are there any boardmakers planning regular boards for this chip?
Why does P4 with 2x64bit memory-bus get so much better results than opteron with 2x64bit memory-bus? One would think that since the mem-controller is integrated on the Opteron, it would get better results. Also, since each CPU has it's own memory-bank but they can still use other CPU's memory as well, the bandwidth should go up as number of CPU's increase. But still, P4 has more bandwidth than 2x Opterons! How can that be? IS there something wrong with the chip Tom benchmarked?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
No, if you go purely by SPECmarks then the Opteron roundly trashes the Xeon... and it definitely holds its own against Itanium2.
SPECint2000 for a single CPU system (x44) is 163% of the Xeon result. SPECfp2000 is 111%.
For dual CPU systems, the x44 SPECint is 115% of Xeon and SPECfp is 193%. For quad systems the numbers go to 139% and 243%, respectively. The charts on the AMD website are a bit weird here, since they use the dual Xeon system as a baseline.
Of course, there are lies, damned lies, and benchmarks. SPECmarks hardly show the whole story. But by any measure the Opteron's price::performance is astounding... even without considering the 64-bit capabilities. Consider that this is a tenth of the price of the Itanium2 for 95% (or more) of the performance.
That Duron is pumping 45w of heat....
Opteron is putting out 41w
Xeon 3.06 is putting out 81.9w
And the real beauty is, an XP 2400 cost $94 because of the opteron price war.
Reaganomics lives in tech land.
All the good stuff trickles down to us eventually.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
Finally been able to read the whole article, damn 404's, I think the opteron is very reasonable as a workstation its not bleeding edge compared to the dual xeon rig, but it all comes down to the price, if amd can sell this chip slightly cheaper than the xeon then its definately gonna sell extremely well, my only worry is the yield per wafer, this is really gonna have a huge affect on the price i dont know if they can afford to price it cheaper than the xeon, im confused at where this is being marketed, is it a direct competitor to the itanium(2) or xeon?
I'm just a little dissapointed with the whole ddr2 situation, i find it interesting that some mobo maufacurers have already worked out how to disable the on-chip memory controller, will using a northbridge memory controller have even larger latencies as a side affect of that? i suppose its just gonna depend on how long it takes amd to react and change the controller.
I think the smartest thing they can do with this chip is upgrade the controller to ddr2 and move to a 9ìm production processes, but is this gonna happen anyway because of the fab venture with ibm?
Use a paintball gun (with no paintballs, of course!) Works great.
Fellowship 9/11
I always laughed about hom much my friends spent on their setups a couple years ago. With the exception of my Athlon 850 box, my ENTIRE SETUP (4-6 boxes + 100Mbps BayStack switch + CAT5 patch panel + cabling) was put together using stuff other people were throwing away. Most of my stuff was literally pulled out of dumpsters. Last year, though, I did a few quick calculations and found out that I was spending about $600 a year on electricity for all those old power hogs. So much for "free computers", eh?
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I wish he did do some more appropriate tests, though. By far, the one app that I spend the most time waiting for on my desktop, is gcc and I would love to have seen comparative timings for that. Time gcc building itself or the kernel or a whole Gentoo system (I both love and hate Gentoo ;-) or something, make -j 3.
It would also be interesting to see comparative timings for mencoder, though it might be hard to justify that as a benchmark when you have a multiprocessor system.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
No this is not what Pabst is trying to convey.
What Pabst is trying to convery is that he needs more views on his website, even though historically, he's made a point of exagerrating the statistical differences between test results to push Asus motherboards (for example). I remember him making a huge procuction out of a less than one percent difference in the performance between sone dual processor motherboards. I realised then that either he was mathemathically incompetent or he was just a shill for his advertisers.
Either way, he's not worth the bother of checking out anymore.
dave
...with no NUMA support. Means it wasn't using the memory controllers optimally (only one channel used instead of two).
Tom's review was laughable at best.