Re: Core 2 or Opteron

From: "Claus Guttesen" <kometen(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mindaugas <mind(at)bi(dot)lt>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Core 2 or Opteron
Date: 2006-12-07 10:44:48
Message-ID: b41c75520612070244q7c9290a3xa8b07272ad7f4ff4@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

> We're planning new server or two for PostgreSQL and I'm wondering Intel
> Core 2 (Woodcrest for servers?) or Opteron is faster for PostgreSQL now?
>
> When I look through hardware sites Core 2 wins. But I believe those tests
> mostly are being done in 32 bits. Does the picture change in 64 bits?

We just migrated from a 4-way opteron @ 2 GHz with 8 GB ram to a DL380
G5 with a 4-way woodcrest @ 3 GHz and 16 GB ram. It was like night and
day, system load dropped, not just quite a bit, but almost by a factor
of 100 in worst case scenarios.

Going from a 64 MB diskcontroller to a 256 MB ditto probably helped
some and so did a speedup from 2 -> 3 GHz, but overall it seems the
new woodcrest cpu's feel at home doing db-stuff.

This is on FreeBSD 6.2 RC1 and postgresql 7.4.14.

> And I also remember that in PostgreSQL Opteron earlier had huge advantage
> over older Xeons. But did Intel manage to change picture now?

That was pre-woodcrest, aka. nocona and before. Horrible and the
reason I went for opteron to begin with. But AMD probably wont sit
idle.

The link posted in another reply illustrates the current situation quite well.

regards
Claus

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mindaugas 2006-12-07 11:05:24 Re: Core 2 or Opteron
Previous Message Arjen van der Meijden 2006-12-07 10:29:48 Re: Core 2 or Opteron