[clug] Which to go for?
Andrew Janke
a.janke at gmail.com
Sat Jan 16 03:34:05 MST 2010
>> The test involves about 40MB of disk I/O and a bunch of CPU.
>
> Cool - we've come a long way!
>
> The one which interests me though is:
>
> Intel 3.16Ghz Core2Duo 6144KB cache 8GB RAM Ubuntu Hardy i386 4m 54.74s igns
>
> Intel 3.16Ghz Core2Duo 6144KB cache 8GB RAM Ubuntu Intrepid amd64 2m 50.41s new igns
>
> .. so you got a 60% increase in speed by going to a 64-bit OS and kernel? Any other serious hardware changes (actually Vladimir did these tests, not you, do you know)? Wow!
I don't remember the speed increase being that large, in my tests it
was usually closer to 40% but certainly very noticeable. That and
remember that the i386 version would have to have been running one of
those "bigiron" kernels or whatever they were called to get to the
full 8GB. Perhaps there was something else in that part of it?
I'd have to check with Vlad. (who incidentally _is_ Russian).
What I find more interesting in this list are numbers like this:
MIPS 400MHz, R12000 8MB/32KB cache 28GB RAM IRIX 6.5.x
28m 12.95s yorick AJ
IBM 1.5GHz G4 512KB cache 1GB RAM OS X 10.3.9
21m 07.00s PowerBook G4 LC
Intel 1.4GHz Pent III 512KB cache 4GB RAM Debian Sarge
15m 24.73s Dell-1650 JFM
This means that a top of the line MIPS CPU in a $6million buck 64CPU
SGI Origin 3800 series machine with Fibre SAN disks and the works (for
the time) can be beaten by a G4 laptop of the same era.... And be
embarrassed by a Pentium III.
Now we all know that the SGI system would have whipped said contenders
with a parallel job but the point being this is what a certain lab was
sold to do exactly the task that I used for benchmarking.... :)
Horses for courses, but as it stands they would have been better off
buying 64 Mac laptops and a switch. Certainly would have been
cheaper, and think of all the shiny fruit emblems!
--
Andrew Janke
(a.janke at gmail.com || http://a.janke.googlepages.com/)
Canberra->Australia +61 (402) 700 883
More information about the linux
mailing list