Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 19:32:01 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> To: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@withagen.nl> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System advice requested Message-ID: <402CB5B1.4070505@pacific.net.sg> In-Reply-To: <0b8201c3f222$a7d3eec0$471b3dd4@dual> References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0402131154550.6848-100000@wn4.sci.kun.nl> <0b8201c3f222$a7d3eec0$471b3dd4@dual>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: > Like you suggest: > I've also got some taxes to burn It looks like this is the reason for many of the big machines. > I knew about the SATA stuff from current@, but I would expect that > carefull choices can prevent some of the major pittfalls. > I'll have a go at the archive. > If you are already at burning money, take SCSI. Those boards are available with two SCSI U320 channels. It also gives you a real speed gain. I have a dual Athlon box. It has had for a while an additional IDE drive. It is real slow compared to SCSI and give a pretty high CPU load compared to SCSI. >>For all of that, dual opteron sounds massively overdone. Unless you can >>write off the system for tax purposes, or desperately want to play with >>dually stuff, there's no performance benefit over, say, an athlon XP >>1600+. Performance in the sense of "snappy desktop use". >> A dual machine has even under load an extremely snappy desktop. The general speed gain is really not worth to mention, but the responsivnes of an SMP machine is real good. I use since some years for serious machines Tyan motherboards. But I have not touched an Opteron board yet. Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?402CB5B1.4070505>