AMD's dual core Opteron & Athlon 64 X2 - Server/Desktop Performance Preview
by Anand Lal Shimpi, Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on April 21, 2005 9:25 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Data Warehouse Results
This test is different than our other tests as there are no parallel queries being executed. On the other hand, the query optimizer is able to use parallel execution and utilize multiple processors for the same query. This does not lead to the same CPU load as parallel queries, but does demonstrate a measurable difference in execution time.In these tests, the datasets are mostly 100,000+ records and are many times larger than the L2 and L3 cache; thus, the additional cache is of no benefit. It is all about the number of instructions that can be completed in a given period. The ability to move data quickly in and out of the CPU are the characteristics of a winner in this test.
- There is a 30% spread in results between the fastest and slowest platform. Yet again, it is proof that you do not have to be CPU bound to recognize a performance gain from a hardware upgrade.
- The Dual Opteron 252's lead by 19% over the closest Xeon, which was the Quad Xeon 3.6 GHz 667MHz FSB
- The Quad Xeon 3.6 GHz 667MHz outperformed the Dual 3.6GHz 800MHz FSB by 8%.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
144 Comments
View All Comments
Zebo - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
It's all good Jep. I was mainly hoping you'd link me to a real live X2 over at xtreme which is why I persisted;)Minotar - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
All I can say is WOW!!! AMD keeps kicking more and more ass!!!!!!Jep4444 - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
why would i make this up? im just saying what i was told, for all i know that person made it upPS if anyone tries to comment and i dont respond within the next 3 days, its cause i wont be on, not cause im backing out of what i said
Zebo - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
Frankey Jep I'm not buying it. It would cost AMD signifigantly more to make these dual 1MB L2 cores different at the core level. 8XX, 2XX, 1XX, and X2 are identical except for tracing in the pakageing and pins to make them function differently. Check out Tomshardware's recent CPU article about AMD manufacturing and you'll see what I'm talking.Jep4444 - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
im not trying to start a rumour, im very much pro AMD(and if you knew me, i generally dislike attention)all im saying is dont decided it'll be so fast until we see the real thing
Son of a N00b - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
#107......rumor.....looking for attentin....engineering sample...of course rushed....BIOS........shhhh jep...........period:-P
Filibuster - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
If you've actually read through this entire thing, congratulations!Jep4444 - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
#98 what i heard is from word of mouth, not from the site itselfwhile it is true they don't OC very well, apparently the Athlon X2 was rushed and so its functionality wasn't as good as the Opteron 875
from what i hear they don't multi-task nearly aswell as the Opteron does but single threaded performance should still be up to par
the Athlon 64 has had changes made to the ALU amongst other places which would differentiate it from the Opteron aswell
keep in mind i have no actual proof of this and i would love to be wrong but the guys at XS generally know what they're talking about
UzairH - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
AT should run the doom 3 tests again, this time not using the timedemo but actual gameplay run-throughs. If Doom3 uses a seperate thread for physics then dual-core should definitely benefit.fitten - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link
#102 ++