Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 17th Dec 2006 18:32 UTC, submitted by Phoronix
Benchmarks With two Intel Quad-Core Clovertown processors and eight sticks of Kingston FB-DIMM DDR2 Phoronix set out to see the level of memory performance in an octal-core environment. Phoronix has tested the memory in single, dual, and quad memory channel configurations. Read the article to see how the Intel Xeon 5300 performs in various Fully Buffered Dual Inline Memory Module configurations.
Thread beginning with comment 193710
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
all that technology
by jamesd on Sun 17th Dec 2006 20:43 UTC
jamesd
Member since:
2006-01-17

and the fsb and non die mounted mmu still bites them in the a$$.

Even with the best of those numbers its only a 25% improvement, and none of the benchmarks were typical uses for a server. Start a few large transfers of data from disk to ram or disk to network and then do the same benchmarks and see if the benchmarks still hold up.

Everyone is raving about Intel dual core and core duo chips but where are the server type benchmark records?

Reply Score: 4

RE: all that technology
by suryad on Sun 17th Dec 2006 20:56 in reply to "all that technology"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

Well doesnt seem like amd is doing any better now are they? You haeve to consider that with the 'outdated' fsb stuff Intel has the perofrmance crown no matter what way you slice it...whereas AMD does have the integrated MMU and the Hypertransport. Kind of amazing to think what numbers the Intel architecture would be pusing out if it did go MMU and CSI...

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: all that technology
by jamesd on Sun 17th Dec 2006 21:25 in reply to "RE: all that technology"
jamesd Member since:
2006-01-17

Well doesnt seem like amd is doing any better now are they?
perhaps you missed http://www.sun.com/x64/benchmarks/ over 100 word record benchmarks for AMD cpus.

Edited 2006-12-17 21:26

Reply Parent Score: 3

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

I have to agree about the FSB. IMHO this should be junked ASAP. The Memory to CPU bottlneck is Intel's biggest problem.
The raw CPU is fine but they are going to get hammered in late 2007 by the superior data shifting ability of AMD with their Hypertransport.
Server do a lot of bulk data shifting. At the present time, the biggest use of Quad Cores will be in the Server Market (Software Licenses permitting that is...) If you can't get the data in and out of the CPU quicker that your main competitor then you are going to have real problem.
It's ok for the likes of IBM & HP though as they have the resources to design good motherboards but for the rest of us, I see little or no gain over the current conroe CPU's.

Reply Parent Score: 4

stare Member since:
2005-07-06

I have to agree about the FSB. IMHO this should be junked ASAP. The Memory to CPU bottlneck is Intel's biggest problem. The raw CPU is fine but they are going to get hammered in late 2007 by the superior data shifting ability of AMD with their Hypertransport.

In reality AMD CPUs with superior data shifting ability get hammered by QX6700 ;)
http://www.hothardware.com/printarticle.aspx?articleid=911

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: all that technology
by stare on Mon 18th Dec 2006 03:20 in reply to "all that technology"
stare Member since:
2005-07-06

and the fsb and non die mounted mmu still bites them in the a$$.

Well, if by "bittes in the ass" you mean significant performance lead over AMD offerings...

Even with the best of those numbers its only a 25% improvement

Yes, and it shows that octal-core Xeon setup is not limited by FSB.

and none of the benchmarks were typical uses for a server. Start a few large transfers of data from disk to ram or disk to network and then do the same benchmarks and see if the benchmarks still hold up.

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2772
Intel is absolute performance leader in almost all benchmarks.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: all that technology
by jamesd on Mon 18th Dec 2006 04:29 in reply to "RE: all that technology"
jamesd Member since:
2006-01-17

where are server type benchmarks?

those are all toy benchmarks where the main loop in the code fits in l2 if not l1 cache, and the total working set is only 4GB, so nothing really taxing to anything but the cpu.

Reply Parent Score: 3