Matt, I have to say thanks for the well thought out and worded reply. I firmly expected "YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOU BUY FROM THE [EMAIL PROTECTED]@" Type replies, and that's not what I got. Cool. =)
I haven't messed with too many > 3Ghz Intel procs, so I didn't know about the heat issue with those. Right now I've got a rack full of P4's with a few Dual Xeon boxes in there as well. So that issue hasn't risen yet. There was a very interesting video on Toms Hardware a year or two ago with an Intel vs AMD in it. They basically removed the fans/heatsinks from the running chips (while a game of Q3a was running nonetheless), to diplay how each proc handled massive cooling failure. One of the AMD's smoked a bit then went out, the other actually caught fire for a brief second. The PIII caused a bluescreen I believe, but booted back up fine when the heatsink was replaced. (this is the part I love), the P4 actually KEPT RUNNING. The game of Q3a in the background slowed down a lot, but when they placed the heatsink back on the chip, it went back up to full speed. Mmmmm processor throttling. =P I understand after that the Motherboard manufacturers supporting AMD products built in some safeguards, but I don't know if AMD actually integrated anything into the chip itself. I just know that I've never been burned by Intel products, well maybe in the wallet a bit, but never in production. They've always come through for me with flying colors. Thanks, Chris -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Donnon Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Dual Xeons or 2 P4? Chris, In many ways I do agree with you, Intel has spent many years designing and adapting their rackmount systems to be as bombproof as possible, and for my $$$ intel certainly takes the cake. Primarily because of their depth of experience when integrating these types of solutions. I do feel its important to point out the following however Currently it is a complete fallacy that intel "run cooler" than AMD. As it happens Intel currently hold the crown as producing the hottest desktop chip avalible. Thats right, the 3.2 EE processor (and the 3.2c p4) both consume more power and produce more heat than any of the 32bit AMD offerings. Intel was the first of the two companies to break the 80w barrier with the 3.06b , and with current parts you are kidding yourself if you think that the server offerings have any less heat production. This is however, where the greater experience of Intel does show. They build systems with better heat disapation mechanisms than AMD, who most often leave it up to external companies to develop competent solutions to the thermal issues rather than do it themselves. This long experience with rack systems is the reason I select Intel, as despite their greater heat production, they are a better product with a longer history behind it. To the original thread starter. Dual anything is be my choice especially if you get charged per RU. Xeons currently over the AthlonMP's, Opterons I'd still hang off for a few months yet to see if the dev goes well enough to take serious advantage of the 64bit that the cost is worth it. However, if you find yourself a real good AMD person/company, the Dual Athlon can be cheaper and potentially better for HLDS, especially if you use the "barton" core (512kb l2 cache) AthlonMP cpus. Matt _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
