Home > benchmark > AMD Opteron vs Intel Nehalem

AMD Opteron vs Intel Nehalem

I have tested 3 cpus,  AMD Opteron vs Intel Nehalem vs an old Intel.

model name      : Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 2384 (2 quad cores)
model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5570  @ 2.93GHz (2 quad cores, 8 cores real, 16 cores virtual, VT not enabled)
model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.60GHz (2 dual cores) – as 1855 in the chart
model name      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5355  @ 2.66GHz (2 quad cores)

I used UnixBench 5.1 and memory and cpu related tests such as “dhry2reg whetstone-double syscall context1 spawn execl shell1 shell8 shell16 C arithoh short int long float double dc hanoi grep sysexec”.

Each server has different amount of memory.  Speed of memory is important but size doesn’t really matter. None of the tests aims to fill the memory though when more memory added to servers they tend to get slower, though it is such a small difference that it can be ignored.

In the first test only one instance of unixbench runs. In the seconds test, for AMD 8, for Nehalem 16, for old intel (1855) 4. (Nehalem gets very similar result for 8 instances so I didn’t include in the chart.)

  1. Grant
    August 16, 2009 at 07:37

    So you’re saying that the performance of an Intel 8 core with 48 GB of ram is slower than the same with 20GB of ram?

    • xenterprise
      August 16, 2009 at 22:31

      Hi, based on unixbench 5.1 benchmark results, yes. Also as announced each nehalem socket has 3 memory channels and there 2 sockets. So first set of 6 dimms run at 1333 Mhz and second set runs at 1066 Mhz. 48 gb configuration in the test has 12 x 4 dimms while other one has 6×4 dimms. Total memory size was 20 because of a dimm failure at that moment.

      * 1 bank x 3 memory channels per socket is 1333 MHz memory (if CPU supports it)
      * 2 banks x 3 memory channels per socket is 1066 MHz memory
      * 3 banks x 3 memory channels per socket is 800 MHz memory

      For more information you may check this paper and this site.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: