• 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.

the real AMD/Dell debate

F

FreshPrince

Diamond Member
Now that Dell is going AMD, I'm interested in seeing performance differences between intel and amd server processors. Also, what's coming from both companies? Does Intel have a chance in taking the crown back?

does anyone have links to real world benchmarks of opterons vs. xeons?

I'm interested in seeing benches of:

* 3.0GHz/8MB Cache xeons
* 3.0GHz/2x2MB cache dual core xeons
* Opteron 256, 285, 856, 885

in 2way and 4way configs.

Please leave the fanboys at the door, thanks 🙂
 
Quote from online.
A Xeon processor is 32-Bit, and an AMD Opteron processor is 64-Bit.
You're going to get outstanding performance from both machines, so this isn't really a debate between 'which is better' in terms of performance. The real debate is, how will each processor age: what will be better for you 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 years down the road. If you're going to make a serious investment into this machine, and keeping this machine for a while, I'd reccomend getting the 64-Bit Opteron.
 
I thought the Xeon cpu's have 64-bit support. Dell allows 2003 Server 64bit with PE servers running Xeons.
 
bamcre is correct.

Exceptional performance for today and scalability for tomorrow with up to two single-core or dual-core 64-bit Intel® Xeon® processors, 800MHz front side bus, DDR-2 memory, and PCI Express.
 
am I reading this wrong?

the benchmarks shown here say xeons are about the same as opterons 😕

here's a review by anand on dual core xeon vs dual core opteron link

ok, so far, performance wise, I do not see that current technology server processors with Intel or AMD have that much of a difference.

If this is a true statement, why is Dell going AMD again?

does AMD have something coming out that's much faster than Intel's future procs? Isn't intel coming out with a quad core proc soon?

edit: well this review shows that the amd quad dual core opteron spanks the intel quad dual core xeon

so now I'm all confused 😕
 
the benchmarks shown here say xeons are about the same as opterons 😕

Just submitted for recognition but not accepted yet. You seem to have the latest info at your fingertips, so I acknowledge your accomplishment.
 
The new dempsey based systems are right on par with the opterons, atleast on the two way tests I've seen. The woodcrest systems, which will be shipping a month after dempsey starts shipping (for Dell it's the middle of July), offer up to 40% performance gains over the dempsey based systems.

I really think Dell had this planned since the end of last year, beginning of this year and it took them this long to get all the details worked out. I also don't think they expected the woodcrest based systems to be as good as they are. The thing you need to remember is, they're only going opteron in the beginning for the 4 way boxes, a place where the old Xeons did not scale well. I haven't seen any four way tests of the woodcrest systems, but I imagine they scale alot better due to their multiple front side busses that are running at 1333. The new fbdimms seem to help their performance as well.
 
Originally posted by: pkme2
Quote from online.
A Xeon processor is 32-Bit, and an AMD Opteron processor is 64-Bit.
You're going to get outstanding performance from both machines, so this isn't really a debate between 'which is better' in terms of performance. The real debate is, how will each processor age: what will be better for you 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 years down the road. If you're going to make a serious investment into this machine, and keeping this machine for a while, I'd reccomend getting the 64-Bit Opteron.
Click to expand...


Wrong.... They are both 64bit capable.
 
And big deal.... there's been Opteron and Xeon servers on the market for how long???? Dell moving to sell some AMD servers doesn't change anything.

You've been able to compare both xeon and OPteron from HP and IBM. IBM offers both in similar servers, and if you are looking for very similar, then look at the IBM blades.
 
Opteron only really has an advantage in 4 and 8-way systems, though it is not known how well Woodcrest will compete in those areas. Things may get shaken up when quad-core Opterons make their debut.
 
Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Opteron only really has an advantage in 4 and 8-way systems, though it is not known how well Woodcrest will compete in those areas. Things may get shaken up when quad-core Opterons make their debut.
Click to expand...

yup, all benches show that 2 way intel and amd systems aren't that different...

the 4-way systems, amd looks like it blows away the intel systems. which is cool, because we are getting all 4-way servers from now on to build our VM infrastructure D
 
I thought I read that Woodcrest will only be optimal at 8 way, whereas Opteron's will still lead in 2 and 4 way.

Also a main reason why Opterons are chosen over Xeon's is power consumption.

At a certain point (an optimal # of servers), the money you save in the lower power bill (from using Opterons), can go into purchasing more CPU's... in the end giving you more performance for the same, or maybe even less power, lowering your overall cost of ownership.
 
Originally posted by: acole1
I thought I read that Woodcrest will only be optimal at 8 way, whereas Opteron's will still lead in 2 and 4 way.

Also a main reason why Opterons are chosen over Xeon's is power consumption.

At a certain point (an optimal # of servers), the money you save in the lower power bill (from using Opterons), can go into purchasing more CPU's... in the end giving you more performance for the same, or maybe even less power, lowering your overall cost of ownership.
Click to expand...

I don't really buy that low power consumption BS...but that's my opinion..

kinda like the hybrid vehicle debate...ya it's nice, but savings for the enterprise is minimal. I'm looking for performance only.
 
Originally posted by: FreshPrince
Originally posted by: acole1
I thought I read that Woodcrest will only be optimal at 8 way, whereas Opteron's will still lead in 2 and 4 way.

Also a main reason why Opterons are chosen over Xeon's is power consumption.

At a certain point (an optimal # of servers), the money you save in the lower power bill (from using Opterons), can go into purchasing more CPU's... in the end giving you more performance for the same, or maybe even less power, lowering your overall cost of ownership.
Click to expand...

I don't really buy that low power consumption BS...but that's my opinion..

kinda like the hybrid vehicle debate...ya it's nice, but savings for the enterprise is minimal. I'm looking for performance only.
Click to expand...

The power consumption BS really starts to make a difference when you need to upgrade the power transformers outside of the site every 2 or 3 years to keep up with the growth of the server base inside. Also, lowwer power consumption generally means less heat, Again, you can always blast more fans and cooler AC, but if you save a bit on your power usage from cooling and from powering the CPU, then you're site's power grid will be able to go longer without needing any upgrades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top