DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2005-03
Re: Differences between AMD and Intel CPUs [was: Re: Dragonfly and Hyperthreading....]
Well, all I can say EM (not knowing what you real name is since you
haven't bothered to tell anyone) that I think you need to go back and
actually do some research on equivalent systems, because nobody else
is seeing the price differentials you are. Perhaps the problem is that
you seem to have a requirement for PCI-X, which is a very new standard,
which is severely limiting your choices.
Your comments on the Xeon systems are also incorrect... you have to
realize that Xeons are a good fit for the economics that many commercial
installations deal with. Xeon's are very good at handling a certain
class of problems, primarily large parallel database applications, and
because the commercial software in these markets is a *LOT* more
expensive then the actual machine hardware, and usually taylored to
have the best price point when running on big honking boxes, companies
tend to buy big honking Xeon systems for that sort of thing.
I am the last person who would waste money on a bleeding edge system,
but your comments on the matter of Xeons ignores a whole slew
of economic realities.
For me, the difference between Intel and AMD is that my UPS is running
at only 65% of its full load after replacing three of the Intel boxes
with AMD boxes where as before it was running at 90% load. Since my
machines are responsible for the majority of my power bill, that's
several HUNDRED dollars a year in savings for me, at a minimum. The
only contemporary Intel boxes I have left are a P4 cube and a P4/RAMBUS
Tower, and while the cube was cheaper then the AMD equivalent it
wasn't cheaper by much (less then $100), and certainly isn't faster,
and it is easily going to eat at least that much extra in power over
the year so, overall, I just don't buy the argument that Intel's
are cheaper in the long run.