Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:47:45 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Hamilton Hoover <hamilton@twopoint.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance comparison. Message-ID: <14869.39281.931859.671356@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <5716491@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hamilton Hoover <hamilton@twopoint.com> types: > > HI!, there is a performance comparisson between an Intel CELERON > > Processor > > at 600 Mhz and a Pentium III Xeon at the same speed (600Mhz)? > > > > I ask this because am going to buy a processor for a FreeBSD > > system, it will > > be used has desktop (some times) and home server (Proxy server for > > other 3 > > computers with Win98, maybe this FreeBSD server will be used has a > > Web > > Server and SQL (Postgress or solid) Server in the near future. > > This server will have 1 64 MB DIMM or 128 MB DIMM and a IDE DISK > > SAMSUNG > > with 10.2GB > Have you priced a Xenon? Think about what you want your system to be > able to do. The Xenon is the better chip but at a huge cost difference. > You may want to think about getting the celeron pumping up the memory > and going scsi before you go with the Xenon. IMHO That's Xeon, and yes, I know what they cost. I also know that my Xeon systems is a screamer. Actually, going scsi and more memory isn't the only choice. You can trade clock speed for internal cache at a fixed price point for the CPU (motherboards may be another problem). I.e. - for around $80, I can get either a 700MHz Celeron with 128K of cache, or a 450MHz Xeon with four times the cache. For another $20, I can double the cache on the Xeon. The question is - which is going to be better for the application mix *you* want to run? <mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14869.39281.931859.671356>