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
Order Entry Results
Our Vendor test has received quite a bit of interest from certain processor vendors; rightfully so, as the workload is quite difficult to recreate.As you can see from the results below, there are some interesting conclusions that you can draw:
- The Dual Opteron 875 took the lead by 18% over the fastest Quad Intel. This should come as no surprise as we have seen in the past that the memory bandwidth limitation of the Intel FSB architecture does not allow the quads to really stretch their legs. On the other hand, the Integrated Memory Controller of the Opterons allow them to pull ahead.
- The additional L3 cache of the Quad Xeon 3.3GHz allows it to outperform the Quad Xeon 3.6GHz by 16%.
- The Quad Xeon 3.6GHz with the 667MHz FSB is only able to outperform the Dual Xeon 3.6GHz 800MHz FSB by 5%.
- The dual Xeons are able to outpace the dual 252's by 2%, and the single 875 by 5%. The Xeons success here can be attributed to the additional L2 cache.
- The Dual Opteron 875 demonstrated nice scalability by servicing 52% more requests in the same period as the single Opteron 875.
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 ++