On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:47:05 +0100, Gudmund Areskoug
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Krsnendu Dasa wrote:
>> Why are Opteron's recommended? On Anandtech, Tom's Hardware etc they all
>> say
>> that the new Xeon Dual Core beats the Opteron hands down.
>
> beats it under what circumstances? AFAIR, Opterons suitability for LTSP
> lies largely in how it handles multitasking/multithreading, so it might
> be slower on a certain kind of benchmark while remaining on top when it
> has to serve multiple users running many apps simultaneously.
>
> Or is the Xeon improved/better in that respect too?
>
> BR,
> Gudmund
>

I would have thought that for LTSP, we'd want as many processors as
possible, without any one processor being too slow. My reasoning is that
more threads means more single threaded apps can be running without
impinging on other apps, whilst you can still run big apps quickly. For
example I recently had the choice of a quad pIII 750, or a dual Xeon 1.4.
I went for the dual, as there would be more power for single apps on that
set up, so heavy stuff like open office would run faster, rather than just
running on one of the PIIIs. I am not sure if my conclusion are correct,
and would love some concrete varification. I wonder how different numbers
of concurrent users would affect this too. Would I have been better of
with the quad for a larger number of users?

-- 
 From Ben Green


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net

Reply via email to