Re: UltraSPARC versus AMD

Well, you overlook one thing there. SUN has always has a really good I/O
performance - something far from negligible for a database application.
A lot of the PC systems lack that kind of I/O thruput.
Just compare a simple P4 with ATAPI drives to the same P4 with 320 SCSI drives
- the speed difference, particularly using any *nix, is surprisingly
significant and easily visible with the bare eye.
There is a reason why a lot of the financial/insurance institutions (having a
lot of transactions in their DB applications) use either IBM mainframes or
SUN E10k's :-)
Personally I think a weaker processor with top of the line I/O will perform
better for DB apps than the fastest processor with crappy I/O.

i guess the "my $0.02" is in order here :-)

UC

On Saturday 23 April 2005 01:06, William Yu wrote:
> Looked on AMD's website. 132 for 4x875 on Windows, 126 on Linux.
> (Probably Intel compiler on Windows, gcc on Linux.) That gets AMD into
> the $100K 16+ processor Sun system area in terms of performance. Of
> course, Sun still has a crapload of other uptime/reliability features
> built-in to their systems.
>
> William Yu wrote:
> > The numbers don't have the latest dual core Opterons yet. (Don't see
> > them on spec.org yet either.) My random guess right now, 4x2 system
> > would probably be about 140 SpecINT_rate. It's looking like it's faster
> > than have a DC Opteron w/ 1 memory bank versus Dual Opteron w/ 2 memory
> > bank because the interconnect between cores inside a DC CPU is so much
> > faster than the HT motherboard connect.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)

--
Open Source Solutions 4U, LLC 2570 Fleetwood Drive
Phone: +1 650 872 2425 San Bruno, CA 94066
Cell: +1 650 302 2405 United States
Fax: +1 650 872 2417