Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Antony52

Dual Xeon or Amd?

This topic is 5817 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement
what for exactly....?
Well i would imagine that the xeon board and chips cost more then the AMD ones but the Xeon ones are faster if you buy the fastest they got that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you a fool? The only thing a xeon has going for it is its huge cache, with, IMHO, depreciates performance due to cache lookups. Athlon MP is the way forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want the fastest and most stable system of the two, go with the Xeon.

If you are on a budget, go with the Athlon MP.


LostLogic
www.lostlogic.com
Author, Multiplayer Game Programming
Author, Strategy Game Programming with Direct X 9 (Not yet released)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
As someone already said, the only thing Xeon''s have is a huge cache. The cache only adds a SLIGHT bit of performance, because cache lookups are about 1000 times faster than ram lookups. But, you still have the latency from read-ahead transfers from ram to cache in the first place. Xeon''s are way down in speed, considering the last time I looked, they only made P3 models of them. They make Athlon MP''s up to 2400, I believe, which roughly translates to 2,066MHz. Two of those together, with the 20 GHz cache throughput on them, and you''re blazingly fast, even with only 256k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wtf are you guys smoking?
quote:

The only thing a xeon has going for it is its huge cache, with, IMHO, depreciates performance due to cache lookups


Do you even know what a cache is? Shut up and stop spreading misinformation.

I love this part:
quote:

The cache only adds a SLIGHT bit of performance,


and here''s the punchline
quote:
because cache lookups are about 1000 times faster than ram lookups.

LOL!!! 1000 times faster is only a SLIGHT bit of perf!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well can''t really compare performance as I have a dual Xeon 500 and my new dual athalon MP 2000, however I''ve had no trouble with the AMD setup and it''s certainly fast and a whole load cheaper than a Xeon solution. I think the main thing to watch out for, is make sure your cooling is good, my AMD machine has been running without reboot or powerdown for about 2 months with out incident , and it''s usually running at at least 50% CPU

hope this helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
As someone already said, the only thing Xeon's have is a huge cache. The cache only adds a SLIGHT bit of performance, because cache lookups are about 1000 times faster than ram lookups. But, you still have the latency from read-ahead transfers from ram to cache in the first place. Xeon's are way down in speed, considering the last time I looked, they only made P3 models of them. They make Athlon MP's up to 2400, I believe, which roughly translates to 2,066MHz. Two of those together, with the 20 GHz cache throughput on them, and you're blazingly fast, even with only 256k.


Xeon's are available in 2.8ghz speeds now along with the Hyper Threading technology (ie new architecture, 533mhz bus, etc).

I mentioned stability earlier because I am factoring in the historical data. Since AMD MPs are fairly new, they are what I consider less stable since there is less data to go by. Not to be a knock against AMD, they (MP chips) are just new is all.

Oh yeah, there is no need to call people stupid here. We are talking about processors after all, not your mother/wife/family/etc.

LostLogic
www.lostlogic.com
Author, Multiplayer Game Programming
Author, Strategy Game Programming with Direct X 9 (Not yet released)


[edited by - LostLogic on January 1, 2003 6:38:26 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:

Well smartass why don''t you tell us the REAL story?


Cache is a very good thing. More cache == faster CPU, especially on programs that are limited by the cache. That being said, intel''s p4 architecture has a lower IPC than the athlons do, but a higher clock speed.

To really figure out which one is faster, you must:
A) figure out how much money you''re going to spend, then figure out what processors of each you would buy.
B) Go read online reviews at www.tomshardware.com and www.anandtech.com. Make sure you look at the benchmarks that correspond to what you want to do. Going to do a lot of rendering? Check out the raytracing benchmarks. Going to do mp3 encoding? you get the idea
C) Determine which processor is faster for the things you want to do.
D) take some courses on microprocessor architecture(or do some online research at www.arstechnica.com, for example), and stop spewing out crap like depreciates performance due to cache lookups.

quote:

Oh yeah, there is no need to call people stupid here.


Yes there is. When people spew such blatently incorrect information, an admonishion is in order, because they are wasting everyone''s time, and confusing people who don''t know any better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!