RE: Any serious production servers yet?

[Danial Thom <danial_thom@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- James Mansion <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> >I guess I should have qualified my question.
> If
> >you're pushing less than 100Kb/s then there's
> >really no reason to spend 3X the dollars on a
> >multi-core system. So the only real value of
> an
> 
> >As of NOW, the price differential between a
> >single core 2.6ghz Opteron and a dual-core one
> is
> >about 120%. I can't think of many applications
> >that are going to push a 2.6Ghz opteron that
> >justify spending more than twice as much. Of
> 
> While I'd agree that in general CPUs today are
> really pretty fast, I think this '3X' and
> '120%' pitch suggests borked thinking, at least
> for the case of whether to buy a dual core
> socket 939 or 940 chip - because while the cost
> differential is quite steep, its only the CPU
> and
> in effect you get a lot more bang for an
> incremental change in system bucks - you don't
> even need a pricey mobo.

A dual-core 2.6 Opteron is about US$1079. whereas
a single core is about $460. So for about $200.
more I can build 2 2.6Ghz systems that give me a
lot more bang for my buck than 1 dual-core
system.

Intel isn't quite in play yet, since a dual-core
Pentium D doesn't give me the performance of a
single 2.6Ghz Opteron, so there's no point in
even considering it. Woodcrest/Conroe will change
things, of course.

Again, I'm talking about getting past the wall,
so the lower end stuff doesn't buy me anything.

DT

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com