ColdFusion Test Results

Macromedia ColdFusion MX is a rapid application development language that started off under a company named Allaire. It was originally developed in C++ and then interpreted into HTML by the ColdFusion runtime service. Today, ColdFusion runs on top of a J2EE server, and is compiled into Java byte code, which is then executed in the J2EE server's Java Virtual Machine (JVM). ColdFusion MX 6.1 was the version that we used, with the August 2004 updater applied. We left ColdFusion configured with 8 simultaneous requests, we enabled trusted cache, and we set the JVM to 512MB for minimum and maximum heap size as recommended in the Macromedia performance documentation.

The difference between the Opteron and Xeon here was approximately 3%, which isn't far off our deviation of 2.5%. The JVM isn't optimized for either CPU architecture, so the test is completely impacted by the hardware itself. The results here indicate that either CPU platform would result in very similar performance on the ColdFusion MX 6.1 application server.

FuseTalk ColdFusion MX 6.1

FuseTalk ColdFusion MX 6.1

FuseTalk ColdFusion MX 6.1

Index PHP Test Results
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Jason Clark - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    To all those looking for windows 64 bit numbers, we've actually already been testing. Lets just say that the builds we had were a bit too early for benchmarking with. We are continually monitoring the 64 builds, as soon as we have something we can work with we'll do an article.
  • Jason Clark - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    #15, we're looking at doing workstation, just takes time to come up with real meaningful tests.

  • Regs - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    All these dual cores on Web Based Applications! Why not have a workstation section?
  • Jason Clark - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    #7, since the I/O usage was barely 2% throughout the tests, why would you want a different drive? I/O should have no impact on most web applications unless in special cases the app is designed to use I/O for a purpose. Most any web application server out there is going to cache heavily. Anandtech has used IDE drives in our web servers for years, no issues and would perform no different than a Ultra 320 scsi drive.

  • compudog - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    Great work Jason. All you fanboys should READ the article. The big difference on the .Net platform is because of CPU optimizations, not as a result of CPU deficiencies. When/If MS writes optimized code for .NET on K8 the tests would likely be within the 2.5% deviation.

  • ajuez - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    Can you use the Windows 2003 Server 64 bit Edition on both plataforms?

    It could be interesting for future performance!

    Thanks and sorry about my english
  • mikidutzaa - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    Great article. I would LOVE to see the same benchmarks in Linux 32bit AND 64bit!

    If possible, maybe include some lower priced processors (say a 246 & 3.2).
  • Fluff - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    Hmm this version of Server 2003 is not NUMA aware. How would this affect the results?
  • Tides - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

    ah yes, another article that shows very little yet spreads a lot of opinion.why not just say, "we ran 3 programs, opteron won 2 of the 3 tests, but as you can see by our non biased views, the intel system owns the amd system."
  • gimpsoft - Monday, October 18, 2004 - link

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now