Compaq and HP sell them now. They are only available in single processor
systems until next month in which the dual athlons will be out. Dell as
usual is the only major OEM in the world who does not sell AMD chips,
because of very close ties to Intel.
So if I showed you a thousand dollars 20 times, then showed you 500 dollars
and actually counted it out for you, you will still say it's $1000 because
of years of experience? ok...
jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian L. Watt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 4:51 PM
Subject: RE: Benchmarks
> Truth and reality, if AMD really was that much better, or even fairly
close,
> in server performance and stability, don't you think that businesses that
> make millions of dollars selling these machines, i.e. Dell, Compaq, and
HP,
> would start selling AMD superservers. I haven't seen it yet and until I
do
> anyone can run any test they want, but years of experience and actual work
> load tests will keep me with Intel for now! The price is very small trade
> in the grand picture!
>
> CW
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:21 PM
> To: CF-Server
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks
>
>
> What I mean't was actually encoding the video straight from the tape
to
> hdd. Using realProducer or windows media encoder. For serving out the
> video that is different. What I was going to get at is that the AMD chip
> speed seems more burstable while the Pentium chips are consistent. Kind of
> like DSL. For example try running AMD chips on a SQL server vs. a Pentium
> server. The AMD server might respond sometimes faster on queries but
> othertimes very slow, it might even look like the server has locked up at
> certain times. This can make troubleshooting the less expensive server
very
> difficult. On the other hand the sql server with the pentium chips will
run
> very consistently with the queries, even if you get enough traffic to set
> the processors at 100% the machine would not appear to be locked up. I
put
> down video encoding in my first response because I believe that is the
> easiest way to measure processor performance.
>
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks
>
>
> > I would agree that if you need to do lots of live video encoding for a
> web
> > site, a P4 is probably by far the best solution. I current have a site
> that
> > handles 10 live encoded asf streams on a Dual P3 fine though. It's not
> > hurting yet.
> > However the majority of us do not encode video on our web and database
> > servers which is why I posted to CF-Server, not a video editing list.
> >
> > I think though the biggest place I'd notice the difference is my
> pocketbook.
> > A $2000 machine beat a $8000 one. I think I'd wait that extra few
seconds
> if
> > I ever encoded some video.
> >
> > jon
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "CF-Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:31 AM
> > Subject: Re: Benchmarks
> >
> >
> > > I promise you that you can tell the difference if you are doing video
> > > encoding.
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jon Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "CF-Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 4:14 AM
> > > Subject: Benchmarks
> > >
> > >
> > > > I thought I'd post some very interesting benchmarks that I suspected
> to
> > be
> > > the case, but never have been able to confirm it myself. These are
> > > especially enlightening to me because of the seemingly blind adherance
> to
> > > Intel in the server world that we are a part of.
> > > > AnandTech recently did a review of the new Dual P4 Xeon's. One
> benchmark
> > > was partcularily interesting.
> > > > They recorded a 30 minute transaction log of their forums, which
runs
> > > FuseTalk. During the 30 minute recording there were: 105267 selects,
> 4984
> > > updates, 701 inserts and 5 deletes performed on the database. They
then
> > ran
> > > the transaction logs on each of the platforms they tested.
> > > >
> > > > Heres what they found:
> > > >
> > > > Dual P4 Xeon 1.7 GHZ
> > > > 14m 49s
> > > > Dual P3 933 MHz
> > > > 22m 34s
> > > > Single P4 Xeon 1.7GHZ
> > > > 22m 31s
> > > >
> > > > and the shocker
> > > >
> > > > Single AMD Athlon 1.2 Ghz
> > > > 18m 6s
> > > >
> > > > Here is a link to the article:
> > > > http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1472
> > > >
> > > > Considering the huge price gap between a dual P3 and a run of the
mill
> > > Athlon this seems incredible to me.
> > > >
> > > > My only comment wuold be, the next time you throw money at a
problem.
> > You
> > > might want to throw it in the right direction!
> > > >
> > > > I cant say how many times, the Intel drones in this industry have
> > > questioned me when I in passing mention that I only use AMD chips. It
> just
> > > comes down to price for me, but now I can stand on firm ground and
tell
> > them
> > > to go waste their money!
> > > > Of course, someone will eventually try to pull the reliability card.
> It
> > > will be of no use, I have had ammo there for a while now.
> > > >
> > > > jon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com
