On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeb Havinga wrote:
>> The rather wierd dip at 5 threads is consistent over multiple tries
> I've seen that twice on 4 core systems now. The spot where there's just one
> more thread than cores seems to be the worst case for cache thrashing on a
> lot of these servers.
> How much total RAM is in this server? Are all the slots filled? Just
> filling in a spreadsheet I have here with sample configs of various
> Yeb's results look right to me now. That's what an AMD Phenom II X4 940 @
> 3.00GHz should look like. It's a little faster, memory-wise, than my older
> Intel Q6600 @ 2.4GHz. So they've finally caught up with that generation of
> Intel's stuff. But my current desktop quad-core i860 with hyperthreading is
> nearly twice as fast in terms of memory access at every thread size. That's
> why I own one of them instead of a Phenom II X4.
your i860? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_i860 wow!. :D
Now, seriously: what memory (brand/model) does the Q6600 and your
newer desktop have?
I'm just too curious, last time I was able to run benchmarks myself
was with a core2duo and a athlon 64 x2, back then: core2due beated
athlon at almost anything.
Nowadays, it looks like amd is playing the "more cores for the money"
game, but I think that sooner or later they will catchup again, and
when that happen: Intel will just get another ET chip, and put on
marked,and so on! :D
This is a game where the winners are: us!
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Yeb Havinga||Date: 2010-08-31 16:08:32|
|Subject: Re: Performance on new 64bit server compared to my 32bit
|Previous:||From: Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa||Date: 2010-08-31 15:53:24|
|Subject: Re: Performance on new 64bit server compared to my 32bit desktop|