AMD Opteron vs. Intel Xeon: Database Performance Shootout
by Anand Lal Shimpi, Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on March 2, 2004 2:11 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
AnandTech Forums Database Test Results
The results are split up into two categories: 2-way and 4-way setups. Remember that the 3.2GHz Potomac based Xeon is only available in 2-way configurations and is thus absent from the 4-way graphs. The labels are as follows: CPU Name Clock Speed/FSB Speed/Cache Size (e.g. Xeon 3.0GHz/400/4MB = Xeon 3.0GHz, 400MHz FSB, 4MB L3 cache). Keep in mind that all Xeons have a 512KB on-die L2 cache, and all Opterons have a 1MB on-die L2 cache (but no L3 cache).
Despite the fact that we're dealing with a pretty hefty database, the Xeon does not benefit from a massive 4MB L3 cache here. For most transactional database applications, the search queries that will be running are small enough to fit inside caches much smaller than 4MB since they are very specific queries to well indexed databases. More general queries however would increase the need for a larger cache.
What we do see is that the Potomac's 533MHz FSB and higher clock speed come in handy and bring the Xeon to within striking distance of the Opteron, but at 2.2GHz the Opteron holds onto a 5% lead.
Once we look at 4-way configurations, the Opteron maintains an 11% performance lead over the fastest Xeon MP.
When looking at write performance, the Opteron once again maintains a small lead in the 2-way performance category.
...but add another 2 processors to all of the systems and the Opteron flexes its muscle once again. It's clear that AMD put together a very scalable design with Opteron and it's paying off.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Pumpkin, maybe next time there is 4GB of DDR400 ECC laying around we'll give it a run. It wasn't readily available to us when these tests were run. And in all honesty I doubt it would change any numbers by anything more than a percent. The bigger picture would remain the same.Cheers.
Blackbrrd - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
It would have been real interesting to see a comparison with the Athlon MP processor platform...Pumpkinierre - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
#24 Opterons are now specified for DDR 400. So you should have tested them (and all the cpu's) at their maximum spec.. It might have made the difference in the 2way test where the opterons were close but not quite up to the Xeons.Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
William, all we had on hand were the Xeons tested... we had requested 1MB parts but they didnt make it.hirschma
Tyan S4880 is one that I know of, and the system we used is a reference amd system ("Quartet"). Appro makes a server based on it I think and a few other companies.
Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Ski.Slow DDR333? It isn't slow, and it was what we had and it remained the same across platforms. These are servers not watercooled tweaked out systems running DDR500 :) This is a CPU test not a memory round up guys.
Jason Clark - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
zomg555 broaden your thinking to an IT director who is about to spend 50K on a server that has to last him X years. Do you spend it on a cpu capable of 32 bit only or a cpu capable of 64 bit that is also faster in 32 bit?. Then, look at the cost of each platform as per our cost graphs.William Yu - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
If you already have 4P Xeon servers, there's no point in switching. But for a new 4P server, the difference isn't just 10%. It's $8800 based on the list price difference between the Xeon MP 4MB 3.2 and the Opteron 848. If it's somebody else's money, what the hell, buy the Xeon. If you have a direct stake in the financial status of the company...zomg555 - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
I was a little surprised by how close this test was. 10% more performance isn't enough to get most shops to switch from Intel Xeon to a new platform.It would have been interesting to see some tests with more than 4GB of memory, though. In these tests, the Xeons weren't paying a PAE bounce penalty, which would be sapping a lot of performance in servers with more physical memory.
hirschma - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
What hardware was used on these tests, just out of curiousity? Where can one get 4-way boards for Operton? I'd sure love to build a monster like that.William Yu - Tuesday, March 2, 2004 - link
Can you run these tests on the "crippled" Xeons with no L3 and 1MB L3? That would give a good picture for those who currently have Xeons and are exploring upgrades to their servers. (I.e., popin replacement for $$$ versus wholesale replacement.)