Dual Processor Equivalent?

[bluestrobe]

I currently have a dual P3 933mhz FTP Server running at the moment. I was planning on using a 2.8ghz P4 CPU I had laying around as a base for a gaming server I want to build. Someone I know is trying to convince me to turn the P3 server into a gaming server but I don't think it?s feasible with the CPU speeds. So just curious, what would be the CPU speed equivalent of a single processor setup compared to the dual 933mhz setup I have?

Always wondered that about dual systems and their single processor equivalents. My friend claimed he noticed a drop in performance from his dual 1.4ghz P3's compare to his current A64 setup.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: bluestrobe
I currently have a dual P3 933mhz FTP Server running at the moment. I was planning on using a 2.8ghz P4 CPU I had laying around as a base for a gaming server I want to build. Someone I know is trying to convince me to turn the P3 server into a gaming server but I don't think it?s feasible with the CPU speeds. So just curious, what would be the CPU speed equivalent of a single processor setup compared to the dual 933mhz setup I have?

Always wondered that about dual systems and their single processor equivalents. My friend claimed he noticed a drop in performance from his dual 1.4ghz P3's compare to his current A64 setup.

Depends.
In the vast majority of cases your P4 will be faster than the P-iii's.
If you look around you can probably find some applications that run better on P-iii's and make very good use of SMP setups, however they'll likely be very rare.
And I don't know for sure, but I'm kinda doubting most game servers are SMP aware anyway.

Remember, 2x933 MHz != 1866 MHz, very few programs will scale linearly with increased numbers of CPU's, the exceptions are pretty much exclusively number crunchers of different kinds.

As for your friends claimed performance drop, it depends on what he's doing.
An SMP desktop will feel more responsive if you're doing CPU heavy work in the background, however any P-iii rig would be utterly crushed in terms of pure CPU performance in non-SMP aware tasks, most games for example.

It all depends on what you're gonna do with your computer.

 

[Hardlin]

A dual processor setup would not increase performance in gaming. Dual processor/core setups help when you are multitasking or running multiple concurrent threads. I would doubt that a dual 1.4Ghz P3 setup is faster than an A64 setup gaming.

It all comes down to how many threads you are running (way over simplified statement) as to how much performance difference there will be between single and dual processor setups.

There are a ton of articles on this now that dual core processors are being released. Just search for them and you should be able to find the answers you are looking for.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I'll bump this for you since my comments aren't going to be technically deep and informed

For single threaded tasks the dual won't have any real advantage over a single of the same CPU. It is in multithreaded apps and multitasking situation where having SMP will show distinct advantages. Take a look at Anand's latest dual-core Opteron write-up to see where, when, and by what degree, the single and dual seperate themselves, and the differences between AMD and Intels architectures as well.

Your bud saying he noticed a drop in performance, would have to be far more detailed to know how to reply properly. In the vast majority of games he is full o' shat, if he multitasks fairly intensely, likes a DC project to get work done while gaming, stuff like that, then he is probably being straight up about that part. In single threaded tasks like most games, the A64 will decimate his P3s.

 

[uOpt]

Well, obviously a single-threaded game doesn't benefit from dual processors.

However, Pentium-4s are not performing well, in particular not the early ones. A 1.3 GHz P3 will blast the hell out of a 1.6 GHz P4 with many or most applications.

The Athlon64 on the other hand performs about as much faster as the clockspeed is. But keep in mind early models are clocked as low as 1.8 GHz, a 1.3 GHz P3 will be pretty close.

 

[Brian23]

You should use your P3 a little bit longer and then get an Athlon X2 when they come out. That way you don't have to worry about single cores.

 

[bluestrobe]

If I could find a decent, affordable P3 Xeon ATX board I would go that route. I might go for a lower end P4 Xeon dual setup later this year. The dual core AMD's are going to be out of my reach for a bit.

 

[hippotautamus]

For a game server, a dual p3 system would be fine. Servers are never anywhere near as demanding as the actual games they serve - Counterstrike source being a perfect example.

 

[uOpt]

Originally posted by: hippotautamus
For a game server, a dual p3 system would be fine. Servers are never anywhere near as demanding as the actual games they serve - Counterstrike source being a perfect example.

Well, don't try that with Call of Duty United Offenvise

 

[bluestrobe]

I plan on starting a BF Vietnam server so I think the P3 setup might be sub par for it.