> Okay. So I'm biased...
>
> Surely you can nice(1) a big job in the background to keep it out of the way
> of user-intensive apps? Depending on your app, you might be giving up a LOT
> in total run time in order to have a "snappy" foreground process. I admit
> that you would still lose some, but if the big job is programed properly,
> you should be fine.
>
> By all means, buy what is best for your situation--just don't artificially
> limit your situation!
Having 4 dual PPro 200 boxes, several dual PII boxen, and a number of
single PII and PIII boxen, I'd like to comment. On anything slower than a
PII 500, the single processor boxes are hard to work with interactively
once you get them under heavy load. All of the boxes with IDE get very
choppy and slow feeling. Regardless of the maximum burst rate an EIDE
controller or disk can support, they're just slower than SCSI. Any of the
machines, though, with the faster PII and PIII chips and SCSI disks,
remain fine even under heavy loads. For instance, a PIII 550 Mhz with U2W
LVD SCSI disks can compile a full kernel in about 2:10, and is still
responsive under load. Putting IDE disks on any of those machines kills
their responsiveness though.
I'd imagine that the Athlon is fast enough that if you have a SCSI
subsystem, you should be able to function well with a single processor.
Slower chips like the Celerons will make you wish for a dual setup- and if
your work isn't time sensitive, will make for a great machine. I'm still
happier working on a dual processor PPro 200 with IDE than I would be on a
PII 333 with SCSI, so the dual processors are really a boon if your chip
is a slower chip or you have a cheaper disk subsystem.
Brian Pape
Computer Resource Services
University California Los Angeles
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
voice: (310) 825-9284
fax: (310) 206-6039
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/dmentre/smp-howto/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
