On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:35:06 -0400 David Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Jakubik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Mike> Steven Hartland wrote: > >> Forget Intel and go for AMD who beat them hands down for DB work: > >> http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2745 > > Mike> It will be interesting to see how Intels new CPUs (Conroe, > Mike> Woodcrest, etc) will perform. From initial gaming benchmarks, > Mike> they seems to outperform the current AMD offerings. But for > Mike> current technology i agree, go for an Opteron system. > > This isn't random. As I understand the issue, the Opteron HT bus > handles synchronization much faster. So for a game --- this doesn't > matter ... games don't (usually) need sync. Databases, however, live > on synchonizaton. If you're a Dell man (and already paying the Dell > tax), consider the Sun 1U's. They offer up to 4 cores in a 1U. Lost me here. Are you saying 1U units from Sun? Or does Dell have a 1U called a "Sun"? I am pretty-much locked into Dell - decision made by others. Actually, I've been pretty happy with the Dell HW, but it's a shame they don't offer AMD servers. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"