• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hurray for AMD!

MAME

Banned
New stuff

Cliff Notes:
If I were building (or, implausibly perhaps, buying) my ultimate workstation right now, I'd want a pair of Opteron 250s beating at the heart of it. The benchmarks speak volumes. For single-processor systems, the Opteron 150 looks like the fastest x86 CPU on the planet. In a multiprocessor configuration, the Opteron 250 scales up very well, even without the benefit of an optimal memory configuration, a NUMA-aware OS, or 64-bit extensions.

By contrast, Intel's dual Xeons are a little bit disappointing. They perform relatively well in CPU-bound apps like 3D rendering programs, which are also largely well optimized for SSE2. But in memory-bound applications where dual Xeons ought to do well, like video encoding, the Xeons' slow bus and RAM hold them back. One has to wonder what Intel is hoping to accomplish by saddling its workstation-class processors with older, slower technology. Even a single Pentium 4 benefits greatly from additional bus and memory bandwidth. Surely a pair of Xeons on shared bus ought to have this same advantage. Intel's apparent willingness to forego such enhancements in favor of adding ever-larger on-chip caches to the Xeon is puzzling.
 
agreed
my nephew at IBM runs extensive benchmarking on web applications/server such as websphere and such (both hardware and software optimization). Long story short, some time ago (2+ months) he specifically told me the Opterons simply spank the Xeons in damn near everything he could throw at them.
 
Originally posted by: PanzerIV
I heart AMD. It's all I use in my system builds.

Hoo-rah!

Only Pentiums in my house have been gotten for free. (work-supplied thinkpad and a P1-200)
 
ive always gone with AMD because they have always been a better "band for yoru buck" and thats even more true now

theres not manu Chips thta are faster then my 2400+ at 2.5 GHz the cost 80$
 
Originally posted by: Anubis
ive always gone with AMD because they have always been a better "band for yoru buck" and thats even more true now

theres not manu Chips thta are faster then my 2400+ at 2.5 GHz the cost 80$

100% true, I don't see why anyone would pick Intel on a limited budget
 
AMD 2400+ Mobile in my main rig, P4 1.6a in my secondary (but it's justified because it runs at 2.4GHz on stock cooling with no Vmod :Q)
 
Originally posted by: Amorphus
Originally posted by: PanzerIV
I heart AMD. It's all I use in my system builds.

Hoo-rah!

Only Pentiums in my house have been gotten for free. (work-supplied thinkpad and a P1-200)

Ironically the only Pentiums in my house are from work too. 😀 If they are free sure I'll take them for a server but my main rig sports an overclocked XP 2500+. 😉
 
Back
Top