From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 16 16:08:13 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADFC31065670 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:08:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@simons-rock.edu) Received: from hedwig.simons-rock.edu (hedwig.simons-rock.edu [208.81.88.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E42A8FC19 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:08:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cesium.hyperfine.info (c2.8d.5646.static.theplanet.com [70.86.141.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hedwig.simons-rock.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6609D2BB343; Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:08:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:08:10 -0500 From: "Peter C. Lai" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F3t_Andr=E1s?= Message-ID: <20100216160810.GJ4648@cesium.hyperfine.info> References: <4B786D3A.3000408@langille.org> <4B7980E0.1020907@langille.org> <33955.188.157.184.107.1266267470.squirrel@mail.deployis.eu> <35489.188.157.184.107.1266269362.squirrel@mail.deployis.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <35489.188.157.184.107.1266269362.squirrel@mail.deployis.eu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List , Dan Naumov Subject: Re: hardware for home use large storage X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:08:13 -0000 On 2010-02-15 10:29:22PM +0100, Gót András wrote: > On Hét, Február 15, 2010 10:15 pm, Dan Naumov wrote: > >>> A C2Q CPU makes little sense right now from a performance POV. For > >>> the price of that C2Q CPU + LGA775 board you can get an i5 750 CPU and > >>> a 1156 socket motherboard that will run circles around that C2Q. You > >>> would lose the ECC though, since that requires the more expensive 1366 > >>> socket CPUs and boards. > >>> > >>> - Sincerely, > >>> Dan Naumov > >>> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> Do have test about this? I'm not really impressed with the i5 series. > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> Andras > >> > > > > There: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=10 > > > > > > The i5 750, which is a 180 euro CPU, beats Q9650 C2Q, which is a 300 euro > > CPU. > > > > > > > > - Sincerely, > > Dan Naumov > > > > > > Oh, I was not up to date on price performance ratio. However I'd compare > the i5 750 to the Q8400 which is also a 2,66GHz one. > Perhaps there is some confusion between the i5 and i3? A C2Q will probably beat an i3 at the same clock speed but i5 750 has 8mb of unified cache and the turboboost feature. IMO a lot of the benchmark differences between an i5 and C2Q can be attributed to DDR3 and the onboard ram controller on the i5 reducing latency (which if one is to believe Herb Sutter, is the bane of all modern CPUs). -- =========================================================== Peter C. Lai | Bard College at Simon's Rock Systems Administrator | 84 Alford Rd. Information Technology Svcs. | Gt. Barrington, MA 01230 USA peter AT simons-rock.edu | (413) 528-7428 ===========================================================