Agreed. The last project I worked on in Cisco IT was hardware evaluation. We compared various HP and Sun x86 computers. For 2-socket tests, the Intel did excellent. For 4-socket (i.e. DL580 G3 vs. DL585), the Opteron did better. This was with various workloads (NCsim, Oracle, compile code, etc).
The Intel Xeon 5160 "degraded" 80% when running 4 tests on 4 cores versus 1 test on 4 cores, but the overall time it took was still better than any of the Opteron testing. Tells me the FSB is still a bottleneck or poor architecture, but the speed at which the Xeon accomplishes tasks is so extraordinary, it doesn't matter. /Brian/ On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 23:07 -0800, Tu Holmes wrote: > I still love the Opteron, but I must admit the new line of Xeons is > VERY fast. > > :D > > On 2/27/07, Brian Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 07:16 +0900, John Summerfield wrote: > > > Most of the folk here think all computers have Intel > processors. > > This sounds a little derogatory, John. I think most people > know all > computers don't have Intel processors. Most people have the > majority of > their experience with RHEL on Intel or AMD > processors. There's a > difference. :-) > > /Brian/ > > -- > Brian Long | | > . | | | . | | | . > ' ' > C I S C O > > _______________________________________________ > rhelv5-beta-list mailing list > rhelv5-beta-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list > > _______________________________________________ > rhelv5-beta-list mailing list > rhelv5-beta-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list -- Brian Long | | . | | | . | | | . ' ' C I S C O _______________________________________________ rhelv5-beta-list mailing list rhelv5-beta-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list
