From owner-freebsd-smp Sun Jul 19 23:13:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01067 for freebsd-smp-outgoing; Sun, 19 Jul 1998 23:13:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from spooky.eis.net.au (spooky.eis.net.au [203.12.171.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA01059 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 1998 23:13:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ernie@spooky.eis.net.au) Received: (from ernie@localhost) by spooky.eis.net.au (8.8.8/8.8.3) id QAA05896; Mon, 20 Jul 1998 16:12:39 +1000 (EST) From: Ernie Elu Message-Id: <199807200612.QAA05896@spooky.eis.net.au> Subject: Re: Pentium vs Pentium Pro vs Pentium II for SMP In-Reply-To: from "B. Richardson" at "Jul 19, 98 09:36:56 pm" To: rabtter@aye.net (B. Richardson) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 16:12:38 +1000 (EST) Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > I just read some info at http://sysdoc.pair.com which kind of suggests > that the Pentium Pro may be a more solid choice for building a > busy SMP server (especially in quad configurations). I have also > ran across some posting in the mailing list archives (can't find > them now :-( ) with some knowledgable folks citing a preference of the > Pentium over the Pentium Pro for busy systems with large memory stating > various reasons like memory bandwidth/path. > > Feedback/comments welcome. > The only problem is that the Pentium Pro has recently been discontinued from production so stocks may dry up soon. - Ernie. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message