AMD Socket-F Opteron vs. Intel Woodcrest
by Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on December 18, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Dell DVD Store (Orders per minute)
Without any power saving features turned on, all four systems perform about the same for the first three Load Points. After the third Load Point the Woodcrest systems start to pull ahead and finish with a 23% lead at the fifth Load Point. It is interesting to note that the performance of the Opteron systems is almost identical. So what did Socket-F bring then, power saving? Also note, the performance of the Woodcrest systems is also very similar until after the fourth Load Point.
With all power saving features turned on, the performance is not all that different... which is a good thing! One small difference is that the 285 is now slightly faster than the 2218 beyond the fifth Load Point. The question is, is the 285 using more power to obtain slight faster performance?
Without any power saving features turned on, all four systems perform about the same for the first three Load Points. After the third Load Point the Woodcrest systems start to pull ahead and finish with a 23% lead at the fifth Load Point. It is interesting to note that the performance of the Opteron systems is almost identical. So what did Socket-F bring then, power saving? Also note, the performance of the Woodcrest systems is also very similar until after the fourth Load Point.
With all power saving features turned on, the performance is not all that different... which is a good thing! One small difference is that the 285 is now slightly faster than the 2218 beyond the fifth Load Point. The question is, is the 285 using more power to obtain slight faster performance?
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
View All Comments
minidad - Thursday, December 21, 2006 - link
Hi,Anandtech has done a lot of hard work here, and should be commended for this, but the methodology appears flawed. The metric of comparison between the different systems is the % cpu utilization at 6 different load points. However, if you examine the Dell DVD Store cpu utilization graphs, the CPU utilization for each load point is different for different cpus except for the two heaviest load points. They should be the same at each load point for correct comparison. In other words, when the opteron 2218 is running at 65% cpu load in load point 3, the woodcrest is running at 50%. Since the load points for the different cpus are not comparable, the conclusions of the article are unfortunately not usable.
Mantruch - Thursday, December 21, 2006 - link
Woodcrests are faster? well, thats all i need to knowNighteye2 - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
Does that version of Windows server support NUMA? It could make a significant impact on results...BikeDude - Thursday, December 21, 2006 - link
NUMA is supported onWindows Server 2003
WinXP SP2
and newer
See reqs at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dllproc/ba...">http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dllproc/ba...
gouyou - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
I think it would be nice to have a test using a linux plateforme. I'm wondering if there is any performance gain for AMD using scheduling and memory management algorithms made with a NUMA set-up in mind. I guess that in some scenari we might see the opteron performance closer to the Intel one.JarredWalton - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
The Dell test runs on Linux, while our forums benchmark runs on Windows Server 2003 x64. We will be providing additional benchmarks in the near future comparing Opteron and Xeon in other ways, so stay tuned.Spacecomber - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
Sorry if I overlooked where this was mentioned in the article, but are these comparable systems comparably priced?Nehemoth - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
Why you don't include information test for Terminal services, for example in out company with have plans to migrate from an old version of Citrix Metaframe to the Windows 2003 server terminal services.And don't care much about the power consumption (in out country the electricity bill is always high not matters what) but i do care much about the upgrade path, for example :
(And taking in mind the HP solutions , DL365 opteron VS DL380G5)
1-If i choose Opteron over Woodcrest will be easy or more cheap to buy more memory next year end?
2-What about Quad Core, i know that i can buy woodcrest QC now but it will become conductible this upgrade concerning the bus of intel or should i see beyond to opteron QC (anyway for an upgrade for a system bought it in january 2007 shall be are less january 2008).
These are the things that matters to me right now and i hope that AT answer those question sooner than later.
Nehemoth - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
HP has curious quad core upgrade pathhttp://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36...">http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36...
mino - Monday, December 18, 2006 - link
As for upgrage path, go AMD.While Woodcrest is usually a bit better than AMD, K8L will be better in allmost every aspect to Clovertown.
Also I doubt 45nm Penryn-derived 4C Xeons will be compatible with current platforms.
As of now I would go for some serious 16DIMM board with cheaper DC like 2214. And plan upgrade in Q407 or Q108 to K8L.