From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 9 10:53:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C723F16A4CE for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (A17-250-248-47.apple.com [17.250.248.47]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C330643D1D for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153]) by smtpout.mac.com (8.12.6/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id i19IreIE029095; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.1.193] (nfw2.codefab.com [66.234.138.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin08/MantshX 3.0) with ESMTP id i19IrdED028762; Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:53:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20040209141200.K13061@ganymede.hub.org> References: <20040209121420.G13061@ganymede.hub.org> <59D53984-5B26-11D8-8AE0-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <20040209141200.K13061@ganymede.hub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <45C0AC64-5B31-11D8-8AE0-003065ABFD92@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Swiger Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:53:38 -0500 To: "Marc G. Fournier" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AMD vs Intel ... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:53:40 -0000 On Feb 9, 2004, at 1:20 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Charles Swiger wrote: >> I know you're not a troll, Marc, but this question is much like asking >> whether emacs or vi makes a better editor. :-) > > Actually, I wasn't asking which one was better though :) I'm only > curious > as to how I can compare the two ... its kinda like Sun vs Intel ... I > know > that the Sun should usually outperform Intel on fp, but Intel tends to > do > a pretty good job against Sun on int operations ... I'd tend to agree, and Kenneth also, it seems-- the raw FP performance of the P4s is kinda pokey compared to their int performance. But whether that matters depends on what tasks you're doing. >> ...although the spec2000fp numbers are 641 vs. 726, so the Xeon does >> better at floating point. For that particular test, anyway. Do you >> require SMP capabilities? What are you trying to do with this >> machine? > > Server environment, Dual Processor ... web/mail/ftp generally ... all > our > current servers are Intel based, but looking at the costs, the AMD are > so > much cheaper, just figured for next one I'd check out what AMD had to > offer as comparable ... > > Just trying to do some comparison shopping ... :) OK. The price difference for AMD vs. Intel is pretty significant, but be aware that you'll also pay a significant premium for dual-proc hardware versus single-proc machines: compare an AMD 2400MP versus the 2400XP price, or the 2.4GHz Xeon P4 vs. a Northwood P4, and then factor in the additional costs for a MP-capable motherboard. Are your machines especially busy, ie CPU-bound? Two 2.4GHz processors is a lot of computing horsepower, although dynamic web content generation or virus scanning can be resource intensive if there's enough traffic... -- -Chuck