[clug] Which to go for?

[Ishwor Gurung]

2010/1/16 Andrew Janke <a.janke at gmail.com>:
>>> 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.

Well "era"  is a bit unclear... I tend to think the economics come to
play. I mean seriously who'd be running Core2Duo for everyday
desktops? in say a decade? probably very few.. and its clock speed
probably would be something of an relic too :) yeah?

[...]
--
Regards
Ishwor Gurung
Key id:0xa98db35e
Key fingerprint:FBEF 0D69 6DE1 C72B A5A8  35FE 5A9B F3BB 4E5E 17B5