Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 02:10:41 -0500 From: Lanny Baron <lnb@FreeBSDsystems.COM> To: Simon <simon@optinet.com> Cc: "freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Multiprocessor system VS one processor system Message-ID: <4056A871.80302@FreeBSDsystems.COM> In-Reply-To: <20040316070405.5857243D3F@mx1.FreeBSD.org> References: <20040316070405.5857243D3F@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
With our Servers (dual and quad), if a CPU becomes defective and causes a crash, when the Server reboots, it will mark the CPU off-line and use the other CPU. That makes it redundant. And that is, for anyone considering their Server to be of prime importance, a hell of lot better than waiting for a replacement of the same cpu with the same stepping. Lanny Simon wrote: > You keep comparing old dual CPUs to a new 2x faster single CPU > server. Why don't you compare the latest dual CPU server to the > latest single CPU server, and then tell us which one you think would > be faster :-) Anyway, dual 500mhz server would be very close to single > 1000Mhz CPU server, as long as everything else is the same. The > idea is to take advantage of multiple CPUs using latest components, > not just any 2 CPUs, but you keep missing this important point. > > PS: dual Xeon 3Ghz would be faster than single Xeon 3Ghz CPU > and there is currently no Xeon 6Ghz CPU, so your only option is > to have more than one CPU to make the server faster, thus SMP. > Of course when Xeon (or whatever they name it) 6Ghz comes out, > your dual Xeon 3Ghz server would be quite outdated and by then > you could have dual 6Ghz server. > > -Simon > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 09:36:17 +0300, Artem Koutchine wrote: > > >>>>of processes with short run periods you will get overal >>>>perfomance somewhere near 5000Mhz. However, when i >>>>subsituted two 500Mhz CPUs with 1500Mhz one (even with >>>>less 2nd level cache) on a heavy loaded web server i notice >>>>that sites started to load faster. So, it seems as >>>>one 3X Mhz CPU is faster that two X MHz CPUs, at least >>>>for web server with sql base and many perl scripts. >>>> >>> >>>This is true as long there is no load until the CPU cache comes >>>into the game. It also depends on how the CPUs are connected to >>>the main memory. >> >> >>Hm.. >>Let me make up a case. >>Two boxes: >>1) Dual CPU X Mhz with Y KB of cache >>2) Sinnge CPU with 2X Mhz and 2Y KB of cache >> >>Which one is faster under FreeBSD? I think the >>second one, because SMP overhead is gone. >> >>Artem >>_______________________________________________ >>freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list >>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware >>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hardware-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Lanny Baron Proud to be 100% FreeBSD http://www.FreeBSDsystems.COM Toll Free: 1.877.963.1900 =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4056A871.80302>