FSB Impact on Performance

We've alluded to FSB bandwidth being a fundamental limitation in Intel's multiprocessor architecture, and now we're here to address the issue a bit further.
A major downside to Intel's reliance on an external North Bridge is that it becomes very expensive to implement multiple high speed FSB interfaces as well as a difficult engineering problem to solve once you grow beyond 2-way configurations. Unfortunately Intel's solution isn't a very elegant one; regardless of whether you're running 1, 2 or 4 Xeon processors they all share the same 64-bit FSB connection to the North Bridge.

The following diagram should help illustrate the bottleneck:

In the case of a 4-way Xeon MP system with a 400MHz FSB, each processor can be offered a maximum of 800MB/s of bandwidth to the North Bridge. If you try running a single processor Pentium 4 3.0GHz with a 400MHz FSB you'll note a significant performance decrease and that's while still giving the processor a full 3.2GB/s of FSB bandwidth; now if you cut that down to 800MB/s the performance of the processor would suffer tremendously.

It is because of this limitation that Intel must rely on larger on-die L3 caches to hide the FSB bottleneck; the more information that can be stored locally in the Xeon's on-die cache, the less frequently the Xeon must request for data to be sent over the heavily trafficked FSB.

What's even worse about this shared FSB is that the problem grows larger as you increase the number of CPUs and their clock speed. A 2-way Xeon system won't experience the negative effects of this FSB bottleneck as much as a 4-way Xeon MP; and a 4-way Xeon MP running at 3GHz will be hurting even more than a 4-way 2.0GHz Xeon MP. It's not a nice situation to be in, but there's nothing you can do to skirt the issue, which is where AMD's solution begins to appear to be much more appealing:

First remember that each Opteron has its own on-die North Bridge and memory controller, so there are no external chipsets to deal with. Each Opteron CPU features three point-to-point Hyper Transport links, delivering 3.2GB/s of bandwidth in each direction (6.4GB/s full duplex). The advantage is clear: as you scale the number of CPUs in an Opteron server there are no FSB bottlenecks to worry about. Scalability on the Opteron is king, which is the result of designing the platform first and foremost for enterprise level server applications.

Intel may be able to add 64-bit extensions to their Xeon MPs, but the performance bottlenecks that exist today will continue to plague the Xeon line until there's a fundamental architecture change.

A Confusing Market Hyper Threading and The Tests
Comments Locked

58 Comments

View All Comments

  • skiboysteve - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    whats the deal with the slow ddr333 memory
  • Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Cygni, if you have a peek at the 2 way web test we took shots of the monsters in that article..

    Cheers
  • SDA - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Ouch. At first it doesn't look like Intel is pwnd (sure, they lose in the four-way benchmarks, but as Opteron vs. Xeon benches go this one's still pretty close)... then the cost of the Xeon is factored in, especially relative to the Opteron 24x (which is even cheaper and equally suitable for 2-way systems).

    Things might change with the FSB800 Xeons, though. The Opteron will still offer a lot more bang for the buck, but the Xeon might offer more bang then. It all depends on how well the 90nm Opterons scale, I guess.
  • Cygni - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Very cool. So if your going 2 way for a DB, Xeon's look pretty good. I wouldnt have expected that.

    And can you guys snap some pics of the 4 way Xeon and Opteron boxes for us techno geeks that need a new wallpaper? ;)
  • Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Numa was turned on.... 64Bit is just waiting on software. Although 64bit is a reality hardware wise, software still has a loooong way to go yet. We may do some 64 Bit .NET stuff at some point in the future as well.
  • SUOrangeman - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Looks like DDR400 ECC+Reg is readily available to me as well ...

    http://www.crucial.com/store/listmodule.asp?module...

    -SUO
  • Boonesmi - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    christophergorge - ddr400 reg/ecc (ie pc3200) is very much available, i just put 2gb in a cad/cam opteron workstation a couple weeks ago
  • dweigert - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    I can't wait to see what happens when they do these again with NUMA turned on and a 64 bit OS. GamePC just released a set of astounding memory benchmarks,

    http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=opt...

    This ought to be some food for thought.
  • menads - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    To the people that said there is no DDR400 w ECC -that is pure BS! ECC/Reg DDR400 IS available for more than an year and the latest official Opteron SPEC submission of AMD is done with such memory!
  • ViRGE - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link

    Just a quick question for whoever knows the answer: what's the die size on the 4MB Xeon?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now