Linux Database Server CPU Comparison

Benchmarks IBM DB2 8.2: Intel versus AMD

Below, you will find our results for the different platforms of AMD and Intel. At the last moment, the Pentium 4 670 3.8 Ghz arrived in the labs, so we decided to give this CPU a quick test run. In these tests, we enabled the new Asynchronous I/O feature, which gave the Intel Xeon a small performance boost (4 to7%), while it made the Opteron perform only a tiny bit faster (1%).

Concurrency	Dual Xeon Irwindale	Single Xeon Irwindale	Dual Xeon Nocona	Single Xeon Nocona	Dual Opteron	Dual Opteron	Single Opteron	Dual Opteron	Intel Pentium D Dual Core	Intel Pentium 4
	3.6 GHz	3.6 GHz	3.6 GHz	3.6 GHz	2.2 GHz	2.4 GHz	2.4 GHz	2.6 GHz	3.2 GHz	3.8 GHz
1	94	90	101	95	97	116	119	124	89	99
2	172	109	164	107	202	219	151	233	141	118
5	207	114	215	110	262	287	156	308	199	123
10	228	115	223	117	268	294	156	320	201	126
20	225	118	207	112	264	306	153	328	202	124
35	232	116	215	116	275	284	153	308	174	120
50	230	114	214	113	275	281	150	307	203	127
AVG	225	115	215	114	269	291	153	314	196	124

All averages are calculated on the concurrency levels from 5 to 50. There is no doubt about it: it pays off big time to invest in a multi-CPU machine in DB2. It is of no use to invest in the fastest single CPU system. A mid-range dual CPU system will easily outperform it.

The table below is an overview of the differences in the CPUs.

Concurrency	Dual versus Single Xeon Irwindale	Dual versus Single Xeon Nocona	Dual Opteron 250 vs Single	Dual Opteron 2,6 GHz versus Irwindale 3,6 GHz	Xeon Irwindale versus Nocona
1	5%	6%	-3%	32%	-7%
2	57%	53%	45%	36%	4%
5	82%	96%	84%	49%	-4%
10	99%	91%	89%	40%	2%
20	92%	84%	100%	46%	9%
35	99%	86%	86%	33%	8%
50	102%	89%	88%	33%	7%
AVG	95%	89%	89%	40%	5%

The performance of DB2 scales almost perfectly on the different platforms. Irwindale scales a little better than two other CPUs, probably thanks to the larger L2-cache. However, this does not save Intel from defeat: the Opteron 2.6 GHz is the champion in these tests. What happened? In our previous test, the fastest Xeon (Nocona 3.6 GHz) was a bit faster than the best Opteron (250, 2.4 GHz). First of all, the Opteron 252 scales very well, and is 8% faster than its older 2.4 GHz brother, as the 252 is clocked at 8.3% higher. But the Xeon Irwindale gets a 5% - 7% performance from its larger L2-cache, so that is not the real issue.

However, when we compared a 64 bit with a 32 DB2 instance, the Opteron gained 13% performance from moving to 64 bit, while the Xeon lost 3 to 4%! Secondly, with the 2.4 kernel, the Xeon gained an additional boost from Hyperthreading, while we could not measure this performance increase anymore. Thirdly, it seems that the Opteron gains more due to the move from the 2.4 kernel to 2.6 kernel than the Xeon.

Benchmarks IBM DB2: Single core versus Dual core

What about our Dual core Opteron 875/275? We managed to get DB2 running on Gentoo, kernel 2.6.12rc5. You can find the results below. All tests have been performed on the MSI K8Master-FAR2.

Concurrency	Dual Dual Core AMD	Single Dual Core AMD	Dual Opteron	Quadcore vs Dual	Dualcore versus Dual Single
	2.2 GHz	2.2 GHz	2.2 GHz
1	107	118	111	-9%	6%
2	194	213	162	-9%	32%
5	368	242	222	52%	9%
10	423	256	227	66%	13%
20	448	253	216	77%	17%
35	434	246	213	76%	16%
50	429	251	218	71%	15%
AVG	421	250	219	68%	14%

Simply amazing how much punch the Dual core 275/875 has. It offers a 14% performance increase over a completely similar configured dual CPU Opteron 248 setup. Add a second core, and DB2 8.2 rewards you with another 70% performance increase. And all this is happening on our ATX MSI K8Master-FAR2 board.

Benchmarks IBM DB2: Single versus Dual versus Quad

What about the “conventional” quad CPU configuration? The Iwill H4103 was our testing platform.

Concurrency	Dual Opteron 848	Quad Opteron 848	Quad versus Dual
	2.2 GHz	2.2 GHz
1	102	104	2%
2	184	186	1%
5	212	318	50%
10	218	358	64%
20	212	375	77%
35	223	393	76%
50	208	377	81%
AVG	214	364	70%

DB2 continues to scale very well. A 70% performance increase is the result of adding two more CPUs. Notice that the Quad CPU need 20 concurrent connections running many queries to get to the full potential (up to 80% performance increase). The Quad Xeon was unfortunately not available to the lab.