AMD or Intel?

[Erich Dollansky]

Hi,

Martin Cracauer wrote:
> For integer workloads Intel's Core2-base Xeons outperforms K8 (the
> old-school AMD64) by about 25-30% per clock per core.  K10 seems to be
> 5-15% faster than K8 for integer workloads (I hope to run my benchmark
> suite on one thi week or weekend).
> 
the guys at heise.de published these numbers:

Prozessoren	Kerne	Takt-	SPEC CPU2006 (Base)
  	im System	frequenz	Einzelkern	Durchsatz
  	 	 	int_2006	fp_2006	int_rate_2006	fp_rate_2006
2 × Opteron 2350 	2×4 	2,0 GHz 	10,2 	11,6 	70,2 	68,3
2 × Opteron 2222 	2×2 	3,0 GHz 	12,8 	13,9 	50,0 	50,2
2 × Opteron 2212 	2×2 	2,0 GHz 	(9,8) 	(10,4) 	(37,9) 	(38,6)
2 × Xeon X5365 	2×4 	3,0 GHz 	15,7
(18,9)	15,8 	72,5
(98,9)	61,9

Yes, the table looks like crap but you should be able to get the idea.

The Xeons are faster if one CPU is running and slower when all are 
running most likelz caused by the memory interface.

The hardware was based on a Broadcom chipset and supported by SuSE but 
not by other Linux versions.

> On the other hand, if you want K8 or K10 in a modern SMP mainboard you
> have to live with NVidia for chipsets, and the socket F boards all

It seems that Broadcom is back into this game.

Erich