Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:06:14 02/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
I will respond to the stuff below, but the discussion is starting to get off course. My assertion was that if Xeons suddenly added 50% to their clockrate overnight that they would begin to eat into the 'server' markets. There are plenty of applications in that space that are CPU bound, where that super fast Xeon would fit nicely. Of course it would not take the entire market, or even 50% of the market. I never said it would. But I'd be willing to bet anything that it would take _some_ of that market (5%, 10%, who knows?). That's all I ever tried to claim in this particular thread. On February 24, 2003 at 00:03:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 23, 2003 at 22:48:35, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>You seem to be ignoring that TPC-W has non-clustered x86 machines in the lead. > > >Where? > >Didn't see a one that wasn't a NUMA-type box with each machine having its >own I/O.... > >I may have overlooked something of course. I posted it a few messages up in this thread. But I overlooked something also, in that every submitted result for TPC-W is an x86 machine. They're all listed as non-cluster machines, up to 16 CPUs, but I don't know what their definition of 'cluster' is. I see something else interesting though. Top 10 TPC-C results for non-clustered(*) machines look like this: 1) 128 CPU Fujitsu SPARC64 GP 563MHz 2) 32 CPU Itanium2 1GHz 3) 32 CPU POWER4 1.3GHz 4) 64 CPU PA-RISC 8700 875MHz 5) <same as 3> 6) <same as 4> 7) <same as 2> 8) 32 CPU XeonMP 2GHz 9) 32 CPU Alpha 21264A 1001MHz 10) 48 CPU Sun SPARC64 GP 563MHz I'll isolate #s 8 and 9 here: 8) Total System Cost - 2,715,310 US $ TPC-C Throughput - 234,325 Price/Performance - 11.59 US $ Availability Date - 03/31/03 Database Manager - Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition Operating System - Microsoft Windows .NET Server 2003 Datacenter Edt. Transaction Monitor - Microsoft COM+ 9) Total System Cost - 10,286,029 US $ TPC-C Throughput - 230,533 Price/Performance - 44.62 US $ Availability Date - 07/30/01 Database Manager - Oracle 9i Database Enterprise Edition Operating System - Compaq Tru64 UNIX V5.1 Transaction Monitor - Compaq DB Web Connector V1.1 How can such a number be explained? I would expect the Alpha machine to win by a large margin, but it actually loses. (*) Again, I don't know how they define cluster. I am not aware of a Windows version that has any kind of NUMA optimizations, however, which I think would be necessary to get a very good score on this type of benchmark, if indeed the machines are NUMA ones.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.