From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 2 12:45:55 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF44B16A4CF for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 12:45:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07BC043D5D for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 12:45:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j42CjslL004639; Mon, 2 May 2005 07:45:54 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <427620C6.5020109@centtech.com> Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 07:44:54 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050325 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mariusz Grad References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050501094429.06974910@64.7.153.2> <20050502121633.GA14896@wask.wask.wroc.pl> In-Reply-To: <20050502121633.GA14896@wask.wask.wroc.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.82/861/Sat Apr 30 04:28:52 2005 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64bit CPUs X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 12:45:55 -0000 Mariusz Grad wrote: > Mike Tancsa: > >>A somewhat obvious question to some perhaps, but what server application >>mix on FreeBSD today sees an improvement using 64bit CPUs ? In my ISP >>centric world, my big apps are BIND, IMAP/POP3, httpd via apache, SMTP, AV >>and SPAM scanning, and firewalls/routing. Apart from larger RAM, why would >>these benefit from the 64bit world ? Or would they ? > > Benefits from AMD64: > - larger RAM limit (40bit memory address), > - 64bit GRPs, > - much faster access to memory (memory controller inside core - no northbridge), > - it much better scales (with many CPUs) (he doesnt share memory bandwith), > - large caches L1 = 64KB, L2 = 1MB (comparing to xeon 12/512K), Some Xeon's have 2MB now.. > - DEP = Data Execution Protection (it has to be supported via OS), Intel has the 'NX' (no execute) bit - isn't this the same? > - Multimedia Extensions for graphics / vector processing. Xeon's have this too I believe (I don't think this is anything new either). > = Opterons remove memory bottlenecks espacially with multi-cpus. > > Ive had large acceleration at: > - math computation (f77, 2-4GB double precision matrix) single opteron 1.8GHz (sun v20z) was 4x faster then celeron 2.4GHz. > - databases (pgsql) Opteron 1.8 GHz 2x faster then Xeon 3.2 That's interesting, although I wouldn't compare a Celeron against an AMD64, but interesting nonetheless. > I would assume that everything which can run: > - in parallel, > - on multi-Opterons CPU, > - which uses heavly RAM, > - which can take benefits from 64bit registers (floating points), > will have _extreamly_ boost comparing to Intels EMT64 (or Itanium2). Agreed.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology A lost ounce of gold may be found, a lost moment of time never. ------------------------------------------------------------------------