Dïscfärm
Learning Storage Performance
...except for Celerons, one would have to guess.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20040507/D82DT2C00.html
[NEWZ] Intel Going Entirely Dual Core In 2005
- Thread starter Dïscfärm
- Start date
...except for Celerons, one would have to guess.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20040507/D82DT2C00.html
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Is this really a big deal? Is it not as if the dual CPU computer has not existed for some time?
ddrueding
Fixture
Well, dual-core'd CPUs will bring parallel-ism to the masses. This will lead to much more development focus in the muti-threaded area and will help those with multiple-CPU systems take better advantage thereof.
That Quad-Opteron board from Tyan is calling my name...
That Quad-Opteron board from Tyan is calling my name...
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
Maybe it'll reduce Intel's horrible throughput loss on additional CPUs in an SMP machine. Or, to put it another way, improve the efficiency of extra CPUs in an SMP rig. Right now, don't Intel chips lose 30-40% or more of each additional CPU to SMP overhead? Maybe the loss will be lower, like closer to the 4-10% the POWER series chips seem to manage.
ddrueding
Fixture
From the benches I've read, they lose about 30% on the second CPU and 60%+ on the quad...due to FSB bus \ memory bandwidth limitations, IIRC.
I don't know if this would fix that problem, or make it worse
I don't know if this would fix that problem, or make it worse
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
On the new Power5 i5 boxes IBM is releasing, the published performance is like this on a 2-chip (4-core) server:
Active Cores -- Performance Rating*
1 -- 3300
2 -- 6000
3 -- ?
4 -- 11700
So the Power5 doesn't lose very much. But then those CPUs probably cost $5-10K each...
* i5 Performance Rating is on a scale that only applies to i5/OS (OS/400) systems. But you can still see the near linear-ness of the scalability.
Active Cores -- Performance Rating*
1 -- 3300
2 -- 6000
3 -- ?
4 -- 11700
So the Power5 doesn't lose very much. But then those CPUs probably cost $5-10K each...
* i5 Performance Rating is on a scale that only applies to i5/OS (OS/400) systems. But you can still see the near linear-ness of the scalability.
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
How does this compare to Opteron's Hyperlink?
Since Opteron's were already known to go dual core and Hyperlink currently kicks stuff big-time, I wonder how they will compare.
Since Opteron's were already known to go dual core and Hyperlink currently kicks stuff big-time, I wonder how they will compare.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
What do you guys think of a dual Athlon XP on a Tyan Tiger MPX chipset board? I was thinking of putting my two T-bred B 1800+'s on one or getting two mobile Barton 2500+'s. The reason I ask is that the popularity of SMP seems to have decreased to nearly undetectable levels recently in the consumer market. Probably something to do with Intel's HT? I honestly haven't heard about anyone running dual CPU's except for Clocker and flagreen. And I believe Clocker got rid of his duallie last year.
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,078
Clocker got rid of his dually?
He, and Splash are my inspirations...
Not to mention Flagreen.
OK: Please see the Splash, what are you running...? Thread.
My two cents are the Athlons are overpriced, weird in some cases, at doing some tasks, scanning in Photoshop for me, using a Canon Scanner,
and, again, overpriced. Since there is not much demand for the dual Athlons, the motherboard prices, and features, aren't great.
Splash sold me on the Supermicro XPDA8 motherboard. Compare it's chipset, and features, and it starts looking like the fantastic deal that it is.
Dual 2.8 Xeons are only 300 each now, with factory sucktacular fans and heatsinks(read:noisy).
Remember, unless this is a server, you need agp support, so check your chipset for that.
My two cents are that if I was, or have, bought a motherboard/chipset combo, it starts, and ends, with a Supermicro motherboard.
s
He, and Splash are my inspirations...
Not to mention Flagreen.
OK: Please see the Splash, what are you running...? Thread.
My two cents are the Athlons are overpriced, weird in some cases, at doing some tasks, scanning in Photoshop for me, using a Canon Scanner,
and, again, overpriced. Since there is not much demand for the dual Athlons, the motherboard prices, and features, aren't great.
Splash sold me on the Supermicro XPDA8 motherboard. Compare it's chipset, and features, and it starts looking like the fantastic deal that it is.
Dual 2.8 Xeons are only 300 each now, with factory sucktacular fans and heatsinks(read:noisy).
Remember, unless this is a server, you need agp support, so check your chipset for that.
My two cents are that if I was, or have, bought a motherboard/chipset combo, it starts, and ends, with a Supermicro motherboard.
s
ddrueding
Fixture
You are talking about 2.8Ghz @ $300 each while saying AMD is overpriced?
With Opteron 242s going for $225 a piece, I'd say Intel is hurting now more than ever (from a tech/perf standpoint, we all know they're still making $$$).
With Opteron 242s going for $225 a piece, I'd say Intel is hurting now more than ever (from a tech/perf standpoint, we all know they're still making $$$).
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,078
DD I must be missing something.
I look at the entire combination of features. Expandability, motherboard features, values, etc.
When I priced this setup, Splash has, and I'm convinced, made the right performance choice.
I looked at the Athlons, since I fully believe, without them, we would be paying 900 dollars, or more, for a Xeon 2.8.
But, the AThlon pricing reminds me of the Mac pricing, absurd.
I needed an AGP capable, scsi,dual cpu, motherboard. I ended up with a XDA8... Supermicro.
s
I look at the entire combination of features. Expandability, motherboard features, values, etc.
When I priced this setup, Splash has, and I'm convinced, made the right performance choice.
I looked at the Athlons, since I fully believe, without them, we would be paying 900 dollars, or more, for a Xeon 2.8.
But, the AThlon pricing reminds me of the Mac pricing, absurd.
I needed an AGP capable, scsi,dual cpu, motherboard. I ended up with a XDA8... Supermicro.
s
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Then we have to set the record straight, don't we?e_dawg said:
AFAIK, Adcadet was running a duallie till recently, when he built an A64 m/c.
Santilli built his duallie a few weeks ago.
The Hawk-Eyed-One ran an Athlon MP set up for quite a while; don't know if he's still using it.
I've been running a duallie since 12/2000.
I've been pricing single and dual-cpu machines to build (Motherboard, CPU's, RAM, Pwr Supply, cheap AGP 4x-8x video). Overall, I believe that in terms of bang-for-the-buck and longevity, you cannot beat an Opteron m/c. There is little difference in memory prices between DDR-400 / DDR-333 / DDR-266. An A-MP solution will mean investing in dead RAM. An Opteron m/c will be cheaper AND faster than a Xeon. I have a huge spreadsheet with all the numbers in it, on which I've spent more time than I'd care to mention.
BTW, AMD's price cuts do show up on Pricewatch, at least for the Opterons (the only one's I'm tracking now).
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
IIRC, Mark has (or had) a dual MP 1900+ box.
Anyone saying that Opteron dualies are over-priced hasn't looked elsewhere or is in desperate need of a calculator. AMD has also dropped their prices yesterday I think. Compare them with the Xeon any way you want, you'll always get the Opteron setup for less, especially with a SuperMicro motherboard on Intel's side.
Anyone saying that Opteron dualies are over-priced hasn't looked elsewhere or is in desperate need of a calculator. AMD has also dropped their prices yesterday I think. Compare them with the Xeon any way you want, you'll always get the Opteron setup for less, especially with a SuperMicro motherboard on Intel's side.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
So what is your recommended dual Opteron setup in Canada with regards to availability as well as price/performance. I haven't been able to find an AGP capable dual Operton board in Canada, though...
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
If you need AGP :e_dawg said:
http://www.bytewizecomputers.com/products/7/7/392/4749
You can shave a hundred bucks by going with a Microstar dual s940 board with only PCI-X slots from the same store.
I know it is expensive, but once you factor in the cost of both processors, it still ends up cheaper than a dual Xeon of comparable rating. Anyway, last time I've checked (five minutes ago), SuperMicro s603 and s604 boards were all above 600$CDN too, unless you settle for one with an obsolete, 400MHz FSB max variety.
BTW, I know the Asus dualie with the i875P chipset is around 300$CDN, but this isn't what I call a server chipset.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
I've been running dual XP1700s on a TigerMP for a couple of years now. Combined with 15K SCSI drives performance is snappy. Actually I haven't turned mine on in a month or so, been having stability problems.
For dual Opteron with AGP then a Tyan K8W or whatever should fit the bill just fine. Supermicro makes quality boards but no Athlon support, Tyan is certainly in the same league tho and has some fantastic Opteron mobos (including the 4 way for about $1500 I believe). Shame the 8xx series costs a premium - still nothing compared to 4 way Xeon MPs tho.
For dual Opteron with AGP then a Tyan K8W or whatever should fit the bill just fine. Supermicro makes quality boards but no Athlon support, Tyan is certainly in the same league tho and has some fantastic Opteron mobos (including the 4 way for about $1500 I believe). Shame the 8xx series costs a premium - still nothing compared to 4 way Xeon MPs tho.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Santilli said:
In your case, you couldn't have chosen Tyan as I don't believe they make the K8W (workstation board with AGP) with built-in SCSI as an option. And the K8S with SCSI doesn't have AGP. But given that most have 4 port SATA RAID, and imminent arrival of SAS, I don't think I would want built-in SCSI anyway right now.
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,078
Pradeep:
You are right. However, I do like having everything on the motherboard, and being able to raid my boot setup. I also didn't like the problems with the first athlon Thunder boards. I have already invested in scsi, and so far, sata has not offered anything I'm intrested in. No drives have the warranty, or service, that Seagate offers on their cheetahs. Nor, in my experience, the reliability.
I priced all this stuff, and like the tide, it changes all the time. I tried to spend money wisely, and with Splash's help, I think I've done that.
I have a proven, very fast motherboard that allows backwards and forwards expansion, and it was only about 550. The processors surprise me, as in some tasks, like Quake III, they get up to 30%, and, unlike my Athlon 1.4 ghz, they are NEVER 100%, freezing my machine.
I think, IIRC, when I was checking Athlons the chips had just come out in 64 bit, and where around a grand, on pricewatch.
Splash has used this motherboard, with excellent success, for a long time, IIRC. I was after long term stability, and I think I have it.
s
You are right. However, I do like having everything on the motherboard, and being able to raid my boot setup. I also didn't like the problems with the first athlon Thunder boards. I have already invested in scsi, and so far, sata has not offered anything I'm intrested in. No drives have the warranty, or service, that Seagate offers on their cheetahs. Nor, in my experience, the reliability.
I priced all this stuff, and like the tide, it changes all the time. I tried to spend money wisely, and with Splash's help, I think I've done that.
I have a proven, very fast motherboard that allows backwards and forwards expansion, and it was only about 550. The processors surprise me, as in some tasks, like Quake III, they get up to 30%, and, unlike my Athlon 1.4 ghz, they are NEVER 100%, freezing my machine.
I think, IIRC, when I was checking Athlons the chips had just come out in 64 bit, and where around a grand, on pricewatch.
Splash has used this motherboard, with excellent success, for a long time, IIRC. I was after long term stability, and I think I have it.
s
e_dawg
Storage Freak
CougTek said:
That is expensive. That's why duallies haven't been too popular these days. Few people want to spend > C$600 on a motherboard, let alone 2 CPU's @ C$400 each. That amount of money can buy 4 Athlon XP mobo + CPU combos! Certainly you won't have PCI-X or 64-bit capability, but I'm not sure a dual Opteron setup is even justifiable for most power users at those prices. Yes, the Opteron is a better value than dual Xeons, but that's not saying much now, is it?
I don't know... It honestly seems like constantly upgrading a single Athlon XP to the price/performance sweet-spot leader each year (currently one would get a mobile Barton 2500+ OC'd to 3200+) offers much better value. And if you must have a dually, it seems like dual Athlon XP's and a C$300 Tyan Tiger board is also a much better value than dual Opterons.
What am I missing, folks? I know there must be several reasons why my esteemed colleagues here at SF really love the prospect of dual Opertons and feel that they are a compelling value.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Instead of 2 x A-Xp on a $300 dual board, get a USD240 Tiger K8W dual board. Start with one Opteron CPU of your choice, and add a second later.
A dual for the sake of having a dual is nuts; as you said, the sweet spot of a well configured single A-XP m/c would be a better choice. If you multi-task heavily, nothing can beat the responsiveness and smoothness of a dual. The definition of multi-task varies widely, of course, and there are objective as well as subjective factors involved in determining just what that is.
My CPU's are laughably old (2 x Coppermine 800/100 MHz running at 900/112), but are more than adequate for my needs. But performance would have been unacceptable if this was a single CPU m/c. My constraint with this m/c is the 1 GB RAM max.
A dual for the sake of having a dual is nuts; as you said, the sweet spot of a well configured single A-XP m/c would be a better choice. If you multi-task heavily, nothing can beat the responsiveness and smoothness of a dual. The definition of multi-task varies widely, of course, and there are objective as well as subjective factors involved in determining just what that is.
My CPU's are laughably old (2 x Coppermine 800/100 MHz running at 900/112), but are more than adequate for my needs. But performance would have been unacceptable if this was a single CPU m/c. My constraint with this m/c is the 1 GB RAM max.
First to say I am currently running a dual XP setup (MP 1900's) and have been for several years) as my main machine. I think Athlons are an excellent value for low-usage dulie's.
The problem with dualie Athlons is not that they aren't stable but rather they are RAM starved when operating heavily. Everything runs off a single single bus like Xeons except that because there has been no updated chipsets for a long time they still run at 266Mhz. A modern XP single processor uses a 400Mhz bus. Because these chipsets have not been updated there are no motherboards with modern technology like SATA. They keep falling behind in the race. It is a shame because I think AMD had a real winner and then dropped the ball.
Xeons have kept up with the bus speed race and thereby now shine better that Athlon dulies in a heads-up competition. The flaw with dual Xeons is cost when compared to dual Athlons. When compared to Opterons though they still share a common bus and thereby don't scale well as you add processors.
When we get into Opterons there is a drastic improvement with bus speed. those multiple Hyer-channel buses at 600-1000Mhz really compare well against Xeons especially when going beyoned dual to quad. Effectively these processors are not limited by the bus that they are attached to and that is why there is very little overall speed improvement with the new 1000Mhz hypertransport buses over the 800Mhz or even the defective 600Mhz bus motherboards.
The problem with dualie Athlons is not that they aren't stable but rather they are RAM starved when operating heavily. Everything runs off a single single bus like Xeons except that because there has been no updated chipsets for a long time they still run at 266Mhz. A modern XP single processor uses a 400Mhz bus. Because these chipsets have not been updated there are no motherboards with modern technology like SATA. They keep falling behind in the race. It is a shame because I think AMD had a real winner and then dropped the ball.
Xeons have kept up with the bus speed race and thereby now shine better that Athlon dulies in a heads-up competition. The flaw with dual Xeons is cost when compared to dual Athlons. When compared to Opterons though they still share a common bus and thereby don't scale well as you add processors.
When we get into Opterons there is a drastic improvement with bus speed. those multiple Hyer-channel buses at 600-1000Mhz really compare well against Xeons especially when going beyoned dual to quad. Effectively these processors are not limited by the bus that they are attached to and that is why there is very little overall speed improvement with the new 1000Mhz hypertransport buses over the 800Mhz or even the defective 600Mhz bus motherboards.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
mubs said:
Only prob with the cheap Tiger/Tomcat K8W is that it only has 32 bit PCI, if that isn't a problem then the value for money is awesome.
Why is SuperMicro looked upon so highly?
My only dealings with them were in the '95~'97 timeframe where I had four HX, VX, TX based boards from them, and all four failed within the warranty period. I have never had any other motherboard from any other manufacturer fail on me before or since.
My only dealings with them were in the '95~'97 timeframe where I had four HX, VX, TX based boards from them, and all four failed within the warranty period. I have never had any other motherboard from any other manufacturer fail on me before or since.
ddrueding
Fixture
I had been keeping up with that thread before and just re-read the first page. It sounded to me like you'd pretty much already made up your mind going in, that's why I stayed out of the conversation.
Adcadet
Storage Freak
e_dawg said:
I was running dual a dual AMD 1.2 GHz system up until November or so. Now I'm running an Athlon 3000+ single. More bang for the buck.
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,078
The reason I had made up my mind was the VIA chipset, etc. problems of the previous Athlons.
Too much drama, buying a motherboard, finding out later the chipset was not all that great, etc.
I'm still a bit out of sorts about the processor eating twain driver, and Photoshop. Doesn't affect my Intel rig at all that way.
I like everything being on the motherboard.
S
Too much drama, buying a motherboard, finding out later the chipset was not all that great, etc.
I'm still a bit out of sorts about the processor eating twain driver, and Photoshop. Doesn't affect my Intel rig at all that way.
I like everything being on the motherboard.
S