Does AMD still score big on memory performance?

[MadAd]

I am trying to plan another 'gaming server' and am looking at what is available. My last one was built on a X2 4000+ (with a slight overclock). From reports it is very fast and from this side of the console things seem to work well in comparison to most competitors (but not all).

Since everything sits in memory im presuming my performance depends solely on memory bandwidth and latency, rather than overall CPU speed and power. My typical load on 40 slots runs no more than 80% CPU.


Whats important.

- Fast from end to end! Have to pick up that extra little bit i am missing

- Heat - As low as possible

- Overclocking - My overclock style is buying a cheap cpu with a decent stepping and tweaking it until the heat rises, then no more. I dont need an extra 25% and then have to rinse the heat out.

- Budget, None, ok as low as possible, a 7200 at most


Ok, so the technical bit. I dont need multicore, I run out of memory first running these things, but most bench figures today focus on maximum frames or how much work can be done, which running at 80% CPU now on a 4000+ means I will just have more headroom surely.

But I need another PC, so thinking Intel might be worth a try now, the E7200 looks good (for intels range) but at a 20% cost over say, a 5600+. Initially I thought that a 1066 bus would be an improvement. Then I find this.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/14573/3

Test 2 and 3 seem to suggest that for raw memory to connecton performance (what gameservers need?) I should stick with AMD, unless I want to spend 2x or 3x on the cpu, which I wont.

Ok I can see in the rest of the review the E7200 spanks the X2s on performance. But is it the type of performance I need?

Confused!

 

[ShawnD1]

Have you tried overclocking your current server? I can't imagine spending money on a new computer for a server. Usually that's what old computers are for.

Why do you think it would rely on memory bandwidth? Most game servers rely on raw computing power.

 

[mooseracing]

To answer your Topic question, yes they do. Intel is working on theirs but hasn't released it yet, and even then we don't know how it will compare or scale as well as AMD's HTT archtecture can.

Whether that is actaully what you need I can't answer.

 

[MadAd]

ok great thanks shawnD1/mooseracing, thats a start

1) I dont need to overclock the current box, the newer one based on the 4000+ is running 80% cpu and stable. Any increases in raw clock speed will just give me more headroom that I dont need now.

I have always overclocked as a way of getting a faster chip cheaper (if the silicon is kind to me) even if i dont need the capacity. I just cant help myself, it has to be clocked. Now I need to add another 40 connections and have used/given out all my old pc stock, so thats a new PC I need. They are cheap as chips now anyway .


2) Its a game server type of application, its connecting to multiple users, the top needs are low ping, and end to end speed of performance. Since more CPU doesnt help me, and these things reside in memory for all their life, what can I do to improve my performance?

Last thing I want is go intel and find out its actually slower because of memory bandwith, memory latency whatever, many reviews focus on maximum frames or peak scores, and thats not really useful, and I dont have all the technical knowledge to chose wisely based on the other factors (yet).


3) Ok, i guess its going to boil down to whether its the on die memory controller is actually what is making me fast compared to my competitors (yeah its a competitive thing, which is a shame because I could explain a little better it it was not). However as stated in the linked review, the memory bandwidth and block transfer tests are largely synthetic and no more tests were done there, so im a little short of being able to evaluate what gives in the real world.



Ultimately, my box has to react (on its own) to an external event 1/3rd of the way around the world faster than anyone else connected with their boxes can. While i cannot control the line latency (the biggest factor) I can certainly pick better or worse hardware, once I figure out where the biggest peformance bottleneck/gain is.

So here i am

 

[Martimus]

The 4850e is the fastest cool running chip that AMD makes (only has 45W TDP).

 

[The J]

How much memory is in your game server? You say that it might be memory performance that's hindering, but could it also just be that you don't have enough memory? I don't know how much memory a game server uses since I've never set one up before so this is really just a random thought.

Would lowering the multiplier and upping the FSB/HTT speed increase bandwidth without increasing heat too much?

 

[MadAd]

overall it commits about 2 gig of the 3 available, but it is variable.

Its not that i think its hindering performance, the box i run atm is commented by others to be fast, but I know its not the fastest and im trying to get to the bottom of what I have to do to make it so.

I was all set to get a E7200 till i read the benchmarks about the Athlon vs Core2 memory performance and hoped someone here would be more knowledgeable on it than I am currently.

As for the mem bandwidth I may have to do that if I get stuck with a DDR2-800 chip.... 1066 is cheap enough now and that way I can lock the bus 1:1 and take the memory up with it - but still I cant make a decision!

Damn i hate this, but i dont want to give up and just buy something and end up worse than I am now.