comparing CPU's

[Ralph Ellis]

On Sunday 27 August 2006 11:10, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Now that Intel finally has something to compare to the Opteron, I'm
> wondering how to compare them.
>
> The problem is there are far too many variables.
>
> One of the common complaints of the Opteron is that it runs too hot.
> So power consumption is one important factor.
>
>  From what I can gather from various sources the latest Intel
> processor Woodcrest ? consumes considerably more current than any
> other Intel processor, so I'd guess it will run hot as well.
>
> Does anyone have a firm grasp on all of the various factors here ?
>
> I did try tomshardware.com, but a direct comparison between an
> opteron and woodcrest is not available yet.
>
> Dave
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml
One of the difficulties is that real world performance and benchmarks are 
often very different. The Pentium 4 was the fastest processor for programs  
that could run entirely in its memory cache but no programs aside from 
benchmarks do this. Once the cpu talked to the rest of the machine, AMD was 
far superior.  The new Woodcrest chips should be faster than the current AMD 
ones but no truely independent tests have been done to confirm that. Intel 
has a long history of "tailored" benchmark tests. AMD should have new 
processors out in the new year to challenge Intel. In the meantime, real 
world experiences indicate that unless you are running a huge database 
server, you are not likely to experience a major performance difference with 
any one of the top processors. As for heat, the Woodcrest is supposed to run 
cooler than the Opteron.  Performance might be similar to the Sun Niagara 
chip.
Ralph Ellis
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml