|
sql
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AMD vs Intel for SQL Servers
I know at one time AMD used to be power players for SQL Servers, but of
late, I am hearing that Intel chips are also proving to be efficient. Can you share what you have seen in your benchmarks on some of the new models say in the HP space using either Intel or AMD ? Thanks On May 3, 6:12 pm, "Hassan" <has***@hotmail.com> wrote: We upgraded to AMD 64 bit dual opteron box with 4 gb memory and we> I know at one time AMD used to be power players for SQL Servers, but of > late, I am hearing that Intel chips are also proving to be efficient. > > Can you share what you have seen in your benchmarks on some of the new > models say in the HP space using either Intel or AMD ? > > Thanks were completely happy with the results. That was almost 2 years ago and back then AMD sort of swept the market with price and performance. AMD memory access architecture for processors is far better than performing then Intel . So I prefer AMD x64 over Intel EMT and has been implementing most of the sql server and desktops with AMD x64 processors On 04.05.2007 03:10, Bulent wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > On May 3, 6:12 pm, "Hassan" <has***@hotmail.com> wrote: Curious: does it really make a difference? I would have guessed that >> I know at one time AMD used to be power players for SQL Servers, but of >> late, I am hearing that Intel chips are also proving to be efficient. >> >> Can you share what you have seen in your benchmarks on some of the new >> models say in the HP space using either Intel or AMD ? > > We upgraded to AMD 64 bit dual opteron box with 4 gb memory and we > were completely happy with the results. That was almost 2 years ago > and back then AMD sort of swept the market with price and > performance. AMD memory access architecture for processors is far > better than performing then Intel . So I prefer AMD x64 over Intel > EMT and has been implementing most of the sql server and desktops with > AMD x64 processors the capabilities of the IO subsystem are far more important for a DB server than the CPU. Kind regards robert > Curious: does it really make a difference? I would have guessed that I would not discount the importance of CPUs to that degree. It's true if > the capabilities of the IO subsystem are far more important for a DB > server than the CPU. your workload is stressing something else, having more processor power wouldn't help much. But in general, it pays to find out which processor works best under what circusmstances. There are still many processing intensive tasks. Plus, vendors are constantly trying to take advantage of the ever increasing processor power, to trade processing for resources that may be under stress. Linchi Show quoteHide quote "Robert Klemme" wrote: > On 04.05.2007 03:10, Bulent wrote: > > On May 3, 6:12 pm, "Hassan" <has***@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> I know at one time AMD used to be power players for SQL Servers, but of > >> late, I am hearing that Intel chips are also proving to be efficient. > >> > >> Can you share what you have seen in your benchmarks on some of the new > >> models say in the HP space using either Intel or AMD ? > > > > We upgraded to AMD 64 bit dual opteron box with 4 gb memory and we > > were completely happy with the results. That was almost 2 years ago > > and back then AMD sort of swept the market with price and > > performance. AMD memory access architecture for processors is far > > better than performing then Intel . So I prefer AMD x64 over Intel > > EMT and has been implementing most of the sql server and desktops with > > AMD x64 processors > > Curious: does it really make a difference? I would have guessed that > the capabilities of the IO subsystem are far more important for a DB > server than the CPU. > > Kind regards > > robert > On May 4, 9:49 pm, Linchi Shea <LinchiS***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > > Curious: does it really make a difference? I would have guessed that Definitely there is the IO subsystem that's very important for> > the capabilities of the IO subsystem are far more important for a DB > > server than the CPU. > > I would not discount the importance of CPUs to that degree. It's true if > your workload is stressing something else, having more processor power > wouldn't help much. But in general, it pays to find out which processor works > best under what circusmstances. There are still many processing intensive > tasks. Plus, vendors are constantly trying to take advantage of the ever > increasing processor power, to trade processing for resources that may be > under stress. > > Linchi > > > > "Robert Klemme" wrote: > > On 04.05.2007 03:10, Bulent wrote: > > > On May 3, 6:12 pm, "Hassan" <has***@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> I know at one time AMD used to be power players for SQL Servers, but of > > >> late, I am hearing that Intel chips are also proving to be efficient. > > > >> Can you share what you have seen in your benchmarks on some of the new > > >> models say in the HP space using either Intel or AMD ? > > > > We upgraded to AMD 64 bit dual opteron box with 4 gb memory and we > > > were completely happy with the results. That was almost 2 years ago > > > and back then AMD sort of swept the market with price and > > > performance. AMD memory access architecture for processors is far > > > better than performing then Intel . So I prefer AMD x64 over Intel > > > EMT and has been implementing most of the sql server and desktops with > > > AMD x64 processors > > > Curious: does it really make a difference? I would have guessed that > > the capabilities of the IO subsystem are far more important for a DB > > server than the CPU. > > > Kind regards > > > robert- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - database servers. The hypertransport technology and direct memory access that amd based systems use is also far better than Intel. Bottom line you will get better IO performance. Before you make your decision check out the those and compare against intel and it's Core2 Duo systems and io, memory access methods.
Other interesting topics
SQL Server 2005 Linked Server IDENTITY_INSERT
SQL Server 2005 - newbie question Case Statement Woes RECEIVE in transactions Difference between Index & Statistics CPU usage and troubleshoot (sp_who2, profiling) SQL Server 2005 Sgent will not start - Service Time out error CR & LF Problems APP_NAME() empty when deleting Could not allocate space for object 'xxx' in database 'abc' becaus |
|||||||||||||||||||||||