Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- From: Mike Jakubik <mikej@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:07:22 -0400
Steven Hartland wrote:
Forget Intel and go for AMD who beat them hands down for DB work:
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2745
It will be interesting to see how Intels new CPUs (Conroe, Woodcrest, etc) will perform. From initial gaming benchmarks, they seems to outperform the current AMD offerings. But for current technology i agree, go for an Opteron system.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- From: David Gilbert
- Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- References:
- Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- From: Bill Moran
- Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- From: Steven Hartland
- Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- Prev by Date: Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- Next by Date: Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- Previous by thread: Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- Next by thread: Re: Dual-core CPU vs. very large cache
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|