The Opteron was intended to be used in multiprocessor configurations with a NUMA design, and functions optimally with processor-local memory and a NUMA-aware OS. This benchmark was done with a degenerate motherboard on which all of the system memory is attached to one of the processors. The other processor must access all system memory indirectly through its peer, and its integrated dual-channel DRAM controller is not utilized at all, halving the maximum memory bandwidth of the system.
Few mass-market dual Opteron boards available now support processor-local memory on both CPUs. Sadly, most vendors seem reluctant to discuss this rather important detail in their whitepapers and marketing material. I think Tyan's boards, specifically their K8W desktop board, does this correctly and is a good choice from this point of view, but costs upwards of $450.
Even with a better designed motherboard, this benchmarker used Windows XP, which is not NUMA-aware. More recent Server 2003 and Linux releases are NUMA-aware, and would have to have been used to take advantage. Such details have been shown to boost performance by 20% in different but more reputable benchmarks.
The Opteron's new memory architecture is arguably a larger advantage over previous generations than its 64-bit arithmetic and addressing modes. This is a feature that it does not share with the G5.
This looks to me like ARIS Technologies is trying to build confidence in their Musicode watermarking technology. This technology relies on watermarks that can be detected and read by all sorts of existing and future MP3 playing devices. However, that means we can also detect and read them, and in theory remove them without affecting the music they're attached to.
Other competing watermarking technologies, such as Blue Spike'sGiovanni cannot be read or so much as detected without a secret key of some sort. These schemes are useful for confirming the origin of a work by someone who holds the secret key, and are not useful for adding annoying copy-control features to MP3 players. A respectable, secure and fully disclosed system could be built with this technology.
Musicode, however, is something more along the lines of CSS. The keys are embedded in all sorts of client devices. It's only a matter of time before somebody comes up with a watermark remover.
In the meantime, ARIS is in the final stages of emplanting their Musicode as the industry-standard annoying copy-control system. The HackSDMI.com thing is really nothing more than a rubber stamp of approval, something to build false confidence in their technology. The deadline was set intentionally short. If their technology was the real thing like RSA RC5, they wouldn't have a deadline.
Somebody really didn't do their homework on 3Dfx drivers here.. The author seems to shrug off the XFree86 4.0 drivers for 3Dfx as being unstable or otherwise unready for public consumption, and instead chose to use the older, indirect XFree86 3.3.6 driver. If this person had built up enough courage to play with CVS, he/she might have discovered that the DRI are in fact closer to release quality than the NVidia drivers, and were even back when NVidia did their release a month ago. The bottom line is, both the NVidia and 3Dfx drivers for XFree86 4.0 are screaming fast and not yet release quality. Why this reviewer chose to use the beta driver put out by NVidia, but not the 3Dfx driver remains a mystery. It really paints an incorrect picture of the state of things. IMHO it's too bad.
Slashdot Mirror
The Opteron was intended to be used in multiprocessor configurations with a NUMA design, and functions optimally with processor-local memory and a NUMA-aware OS. This benchmark was done with a degenerate motherboard on which all of the system memory is attached to one of the processors. The other processor must access all system memory indirectly through its peer, and its integrated dual-channel DRAM controller is not utilized at all, halving the maximum memory bandwidth of the system.
Few mass-market dual Opteron boards available now support processor-local memory on both CPUs. Sadly, most vendors seem reluctant to discuss this rather important detail in their whitepapers and marketing material. I think Tyan's boards, specifically their K8W desktop board, does this correctly and is a good choice from this point of view, but costs upwards of $450.
Even with a better designed motherboard, this benchmarker used Windows XP, which is not NUMA-aware. More recent Server 2003 and Linux releases are NUMA-aware, and would have to have been used to take advantage. Such details have been shown to boost performance by 20% in different but more reputable benchmarks.
The Opteron's new memory architecture is arguably a larger advantage over previous generations than its 64-bit arithmetic and addressing modes. This is a feature that it does not share with the G5.
Other competing watermarking technologies, such as Blue Spike's Giovanni cannot be read or so much as detected without a secret key of some sort. These schemes are useful for confirming the origin of a work by someone who holds the secret key, and are not useful for adding annoying copy-control features to MP3 players. A respectable, secure and fully disclosed system could be built with this technology.
Musicode, however, is something more along the lines of CSS. The keys are embedded in all sorts of client devices. It's only a matter of time before somebody comes up with a watermark remover.
In the meantime, ARIS is in the final stages of emplanting their Musicode as the industry-standard annoying copy-control system. The HackSDMI.com thing is really nothing more than a rubber stamp of approval, something to build false confidence in their technology. The deadline was set intentionally short. If their technology was the real thing like RSA RC5, they wouldn't have a deadline.
Somebody really didn't do their homework on 3Dfx drivers here.. The author seems to shrug off the XFree86 4.0 drivers for 3Dfx as being unstable or otherwise unready for public consumption, and instead chose to use the older, indirect XFree86 3.3.6 driver. If this person had built up enough courage to play with CVS, he/she might have discovered that the DRI are in fact closer to release quality than the NVidia drivers, and were even back when NVidia did their release a month ago. The bottom line is, both the NVidia and 3Dfx drivers for XFree86 4.0 are screaming fast and not yet release quality. Why this reviewer chose to use the beta driver put out by NVidia, but not the 3Dfx driver remains a mystery. It really paints an incorrect picture of the state of things. IMHO it's too bad.