AMD Opteron vs. Intel Xeon: Database Performance Shootout
by Anand Lal Shimpi, Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on March 2, 2004 2:11 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Hyper Threading
Intel's Hyper Threading technology has been widely accepted in the enterprise and desktop markets, to the point where the vast majority of systems ship with Hyper Threading enabled and leave it that way.
Our tests have shown that Hyper Threading improved performance 3 - 5% on average and thus we left it enabled for all of our tests here.
The Tests
We ran two sets of tests for this comparison: an updated version of our own home-grown tests on the AnandTech Forums Database, as well as another more strenuous test representative of enterprise-class transactional database serving applications. We will discuss the two tests in greater detail in the coming pages, but first the basic hardware configuration for our tests:
AMD Opteron 848/248 and Intel Xeon/Xeon MP (Prestonia/Gallatin)
4GB DDR333 (NUMA was enabled for the opteron)
8 x 36GB 15,000RPM Ultra320 SCSI drives in RAID-0
Windows 2003 Enterprise Server
Days, and then weeks went by as we researched and regression-tested various benchmark methodologies in order to come up with fair, repeatable and, most of all, real world database benchmarks. In the past, we've used a trace playback methodology to stress the database. While it served its purpose for the hardware that was tested, it was time for a change. This time around, we wanted to have two different tests: one that represented an average database load, like the AnandTech Forums; and, the other that represented an enterprise level workload.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
skiboysteve - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
whats the deal with the slow ddr333 memoryJason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Cygni, if you have a peek at the 2 way web test we took shots of the monsters in that article..Cheers
SDA - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Ouch. At first it doesn't look like Intel is pwnd (sure, they lose in the four-way benchmarks, but as Opteron vs. Xeon benches go this one's still pretty close)... then the cost of the Xeon is factored in, especially relative to the Opteron 24x (which is even cheaper and equally suitable for 2-way systems).Things might change with the FSB800 Xeons, though. The Opteron will still offer a lot more bang for the buck, but the Xeon might offer more bang then. It all depends on how well the 90nm Opterons scale, I guess.
Cygni - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Very cool. So if your going 2 way for a DB, Xeon's look pretty good. I wouldnt have expected that.And can you guys snap some pics of the 4 way Xeon and Opteron boxes for us techno geeks that need a new wallpaper? ;)
Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Numa was turned on.... 64Bit is just waiting on software. Although 64bit is a reality hardware wise, software still has a loooong way to go yet. We may do some 64 Bit .NET stuff at some point in the future as well.SUOrangeman - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Looks like DDR400 ECC+Reg is readily available to me as well ...http://www.crucial.com/store/listmodule.asp?module...
-SUO
Boonesmi - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
christophergorge - ddr400 reg/ecc (ie pc3200) is very much available, i just put 2gb in a cad/cam opteron workstation a couple weeks agodweigert - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
I can't wait to see what happens when they do these again with NUMA turned on and a 64 bit OS. GamePC just released a set of astounding memory benchmarks,http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=opt...
This ought to be some food for thought.
menads - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
To the people that said there is no DDR400 w ECC -that is pure BS! ECC/Reg DDR400 IS available for more than an year and the latest official Opteron SPEC submission of AMD is done with such memory!ViRGE - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Just a quick question for whoever knows the answer: what's the die size on the 4MB Xeon?