Re: [PERFORM] Status of Opteron vs Xeon

2005-10-07 Thread Emil Briggs
> > Furthermore, it does not do anything to address the consideration that > memory access on Opterons seem to be intrinsically faster than on Xeon > due to differences in the memory bus architecture. > I have been running some tests using different numa policies on a quad Opteron server and have

Re: [PERFORM] Status of Opteron vs Xeon

2005-10-07 Thread Tom Lane
Chris Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Frost) writes: >> What's the current status of how much faster the Opteron is compared >> to the Xeons? I know the Opterons used to be close to 2x faster, >> but is that still the case? I understand much work has been done to >> r

Re: [PERFORM] Status of Opteron vs Xeon

2005-10-07 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Frost) writes: > What's the current status of how much faster the Opteron is compared > to the Xeons? I know the Opterons used to be close to 2x faster, > but is that still the case? I understand much work has been done to > reduce the contect switching storms on the Xeon

Re: [PERFORM] Status of Opteron vs Xeon

2005-10-07 Thread Merlin Moncure
> What's the current status of how much faster the Opteron is compared to > the > Xeons? I know the Opterons used to be close to 2x faster, but is that > still > the case? I understand much work has been done to reduce the contect > switching storms on the Xeon architecture, is this correct? Up