Phenom II X6 1055T vs i5 3570

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

Mir96TA

Golden Member
Oct 21, 2002
1,952
39
91
I need t do a lab setup, which heavily going to use VM in work station.
I am going to deploy 8 Machines. These machines are Cisco unified comm machines (PUB,SUB ,Unity, Presence etc).
I need to pick between Intel or AMD.
Obviously Intel is Lacking Core units. But I am not sure how intel response on Overloading the Cores.
Which ever machine I am going to go over its going to have 32 GB memory
Any advise ?
 
Cerb

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Do you already own both CPUs, and motherboards for them?
 
R

Ramses

Platinum Member
Apr 26, 2000
2,871
4
81
Don't the amd chips support some virtualization that the low end Intels don't? VTd or something like that?
 
A

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
12,017
4,981
136
In principle what matters for such tasks is integer performance, in this respect, and on the AMD camp, a FX83xx 3.3-3.8 should be much better than a X6 1055T.

As for integer performance a FX8350 has about 45% more throughput than a 3570K on benches, this put this latter at the level of a 2.75GHz FX83xx.
 
M

MiddleOfTheRoad

Golden Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,123
5
0
For virtual machines, AMD does make the most sense given those choices. The i5 is pretty neutered for virtualization -- if you plan to go with Intel I really would recommend trying to get a Xeon if possible.

Eight virtual machines would probably run a little better on a FX 83xx as ABwx as mentioned. The Phenom X6 will perform reasonably well, but the FX has 8 integer cores for crunching numbers (and was originally designed as a server chip) -- giving it an edge.
 
M

Mir96TA

Golden Member
Oct 21, 2002
1,952
39
91
Cerb said:
Do you already own both CPUs, and motherboards for them?
Click to expand...
Yes I have those machine, I own it to play games...... Now its time to do some lab testing.
Abwx said:
In principle what matters for such tasks is integer performance, in this respect, and on the AMD camp, a FX83xx 3.3-3.8 should be much better than a X6 1055T.

As for integer performance a FX8350 has about 45% more throughput than a 3570K on benches, this put this latter at the level of a 2.75GHz FX83xx.
Click to expand...
Don't have FX machine,
Only machines I have to play is as follow.
i5-3570 (Quad Core with HT)
1055T (6 Core)
Q9650 (Quad Core)
_________
Laptop
----------
i3 sandybridge
Athlon II

MiddleOfTheRoad said:
For virtual machines, AMD does make the most sense given those choices. The i5 is pretty neutered for virtualization -- if you plan to go with Intel I really would recommend trying to get a Xeon if possible.

Eight virtual machines would probably run a little better on a FX 83xx as ABwx as mentioned. The Phenom X6 will perform reasonably well, but the FX has 8 integer cores for crunching numbers (and was originally designed as a server chip) -- giving it an edge.
Click to expand...

I am not going to buy / Purchase any thing. I am going to use the resource I have.
 
Cerb

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
For virtual machines, AMD does make the most sense given those choices. The i5 is pretty neutered for virtualization -- if you plan to go with Intel I really would recommend trying to get a Xeon if possible.
Click to expand...
An i5 and Xeon are going to be identical on a desktop socket, unless you intend to implement ECC RAM, which is not necessary for the OP at all. The i5-3570 supports virtualization better than the motherboard it is plugged into, I would bet.
 
sm625

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
I'm betting it will run faster on the 3570. The 3570 has 80% higher passmark single thread score, and a 40% higher multithreaded score! Even if the 1055T was faster for some hypothetical esoteric workload, it would only be by a small amount, maybe 10% faster. I personally have not seen one single benchmark where a 1055T was faster than a 3570 in any way. Not even heavily multithreaded integer workloads.
 
M

MiddleOfTheRoad

Golden Member
Aug 6, 2014
1,123
5
0
sm625 said:
I'm betting it will run faster on the 3570. The 3570 has 80% higher passmark single thread score, and a 40% higher multithreaded score! Even if the 1055T was faster for some hypothetical esoteric workload, it would only be by a small amount, maybe 10% faster. I personally have not seen one single benchmark where a 1055T was faster than a 3570 in any way. Not even heavily multithreaded integer workloads.
Click to expand...

That hasn't been my experience with virtual machines. I've never tested the Phenom personally, but the FX 8 cores were quite a bit faster than i5's generally (probably related to the larger cache as well). From what I've seen -- the additional threads and stronger integer performance lead to better performance. I still believe the six core Phenom with be faster than the quad core i5 that the OP is talking about.
 
M

Mir96TA

Golden Member
Oct 21, 2002
1,952
39
91
HTML:
Smoblikat said:
Wouldnt you need 9 cores minimum to run 8 VM's?
Click to expand...

I can over provision the cores.
However I wont do it; due to latency.
I will span out my VM on multiple host.
I am going to install lite VM on weaker Host.
Demanding VM will be on stronger HOST
 
sm625

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
That hasn't been my experience with virtual machines. I've never tested the Phenom personally, but the FX 8 cores were quite a bit faster than i5's generally (probably related to the larger cache as well). From what I've seen -- the additional threads and stronger integer performance lead to better performance. I still believe the six core Phenom with be faster than the quad core i5 that the OP is talking about.
Click to expand...

The FX 8 core is a different story. For all its faults, it is still an integer monster. It crushes both the i5 and the 6 core thuban, beating the 1055T by 80% according to passmark. The thubans are really only good for heavy floating point loads.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom