Mailing List
Home
Forum Home
Linux - General Red Hat Linux discussion list
Installation - Getting started with Red Hat Linux
Enterprise Linux 3 - Discussion of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 (Taroon)
Red Hat Linux 9 - Discussion of Red Hat Linux 9 (Shrike)
Red Hat Linux 7.2 - Discussion of Red Hat Linux 7.2 (Enigma)
Red Hat Linux 7.3 - Discussion of Red Hat Linux 7.3 (Valhalla)
Apache Web Server
Oracle database, Microsoft SQL server ...
Subjects
application/x mplayer2 plugin
RPM error: db4 error(16) from dbenv >remove: Device or resource
   busy
Command stream end of file while reading
X Windows problem (xauth)
Upgrading openoffice 1 1 rpm
FTP: connection refused
FTP: connection refused
mount: /dev/cdrom: is not a valid block device
Dell Precision 650, RedHat 9, no sound
how to trace the cause resulting in the crash of bind server
Virus on the list
UNINSTALL RPM MYSQL
usb pen drives: mounting as a user
broadcom network interface
make mrproper
sendmail configuration on redhat
Couldn 't open PID file /var/run/named/named pid Permission denied
Promise 378 controller
kernel 2 6 and /dev/sound/mixer not found
Problem using up2date
mrtg step by step howto/configuration for a newbie?
Compiling and Installing Kernel 2 6
Can 't locate module ppp0, can 't locate module ppp compress 21
HOW I CAN MAKE BOOTABLE FLOPPY DISKET
Lotus Notes under Wine
/etc/security/limits conf question
Intel E/1000 driver
Command stream end of file while reading
rpm database corrupt
qla2300 modules
 
Opinions AMD64 vs EM64T vs Itanium II

Opinions AMD64 vs EM64T vs Itanium II

2006-08-25       - By Brian Long

 Back
Reply:     1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9     10     >>  

Paul Krizak wrote:
> While I'm obviously a bit biased, I would definitely suggest going with
> an Opteron-based solution.  AMD64 is the original x86-64 implementation
> (EM64T is a clone of our architecture), and thus the linux community has
> had more time to tweak the drivers, compilers, etc. to work with AMD64 cpus.
>
> Also, going with AMD chips provides a long and stable upgrade path.  You
> can start with dual-core DDR2/667 chips in your blades, and then when
> quad-core comes out, you'll be able to upgrade to quad-core DDR2/800+
> chips and stay within the same power envelope.
>
> AMD chips scale much better past four cores than Intel's chips, due to
> Intel sticking with the antiquated front side bus architecture, whereas
> AMD has high-speed HyperTransport links between each chip.  When you get
> those big beefy 4-socket 16-core blades, rest assured that the AMD
> variety will perform much better than an equivalent Xeon configuration,
> even if the 2-socket/4-core performance right now favors the Intel chips.
>
> Paul Krizak                         5900 E. Ben White Blvd. MS 625
> Advanced Micro Devices              Austin, TX  78741
> Linux/Unix Systems Engineering      Phone: (512) 602-8775
> Silicon Design Division

I'll try not to be biased.  I'll agree with Paul that AMD's architecture
has been superior for the last 2+ years, as proven in our production IT
environment as well as Engineering developers working on IOS and other
Cisco products.

We have shown, for example, the HP DL580 G3 is up to 40% slower and 37%
more expensive than the HP DL585.  This includes real-life and
artificial benchmarks.

We are about to evaluate the 2 socket Xeon 5160-based systems for
various reasons, but I tend to believe Paul's last paragraph.  When the
MP version of the Xeon / Woodcrest is released, I imagine it will suffer
from performance issues in comparison to AMD.

Some of our engineering folks use software that costs hundreds of
thousands of dollars per head per year to lease and they always want the
latest and greatest 2 socket system.  Considering the numbers on
http://www.spec.org from Xeon 5160 vs. Opteron 254, we have to evaluate
the Xeons.  :)

/Brian/

--
Taroon-list mailing list
Taroon-list@(protected)
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-list