Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 18:07:02 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> Subject: Re: 64bit CPUs Message-ID: <20050502230702.GH47820@decibel.org> In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050501183331.045c3770@64.7.153.2> References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050501094429.06974910@64.7.153.2> <20050501191001.GF85317@over-yonder.net> <6.2.1.2.0.20050501183331.045c3770@64.7.153.2>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 07:34:31PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > I havent paid that much attention to the comparisons as they tend to be > very windows based and games to boot. But surely its hard to compare > across platforms. The CPUs require different chipsets, so some of the > performance results can be due to the MB and RAM. > http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050221/prescott-10.html#synthetic > The P4 640 3.2Ghz is about the same price at one of my suppliers as the 64 > 3500+ and the numbers are not that different. > > For me to switch to a different platform and risk stability issues there > would have to be some decent payoff in either cost savings or serious > performance differences. I am thinking perhaps for my RADIUS accounting > database which is very large might benefit as I have already maxed out the > RAM. >From what I've seen on the PostgreSQL lists, PostgreSQL sees a huge (30%) performance increase on Opterons over Xeons, and other databases see 10-15%. I haven't seen 32 bit vs 64 bit numbers, but I would expect the increase to be even larger than Xeon to Opteron numbers. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel@decibel.org Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050502230702.GH47820>