[gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Conway S. Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 639 bytes --]

I'm in the planning stages of assembling a new box for myself @ home,
and I'm debating if I want to go with AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon.  I've
been focusing on Tyan motherboards, as I've heard here on the list that
they've got really excellent Linux (and general) support.  In the past
I've mostly gone w/ AMD CPUs, as they had a significantly better
price:performance ratio, but it's been a few years since I last did a
lot of shopping around, and I'm starting to think things may have
changed.  I'm still leaning towards AMD Opterons (Barcelona), but I'm
interested in hearing everyone else's opinions.


TIA,
Conway S. Smith

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Kris Kersey (Augustus)]

Conway,

While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review on 
LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It 
included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.  Here's 
the link: 
http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread

If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.

Thanks,
Kris Kersey (Augustus)
LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
augustus@linuxhardware.org
Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
augustus@gentoo.org
AIM: Augustus22

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007, Conway S. Smith wrote:

> I'm in the planning stages of assembling a new box for myself @ home,
> and I'm debating if I want to go with AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon.  I've
> been focusing on Tyan motherboards, as I've heard here on the list that
> they've got really excellent Linux (and general) support.  In the past
> I've mostly gone w/ AMD CPUs, as they had a significantly better
> price:performance ratio, but it's been a few years since I last did a
> lot of shopping around, and I'm starting to think things may have
> changed.  I'm still leaning towards AMD Opterons (Barcelona), but I'm
> interested in hearing everyone else's opinions.
>
>
> TIA,
> Conway S. Smith
>
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Conway S. Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
"Kris Kersey (Augustus)" <augustus@linuxhardware.org> wrote:
> Conway,
> 
> While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review
> on LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It 
> included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.
> Here's the link: 
> http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread
> 
> If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kris Kersey (Augustus)
> LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
> augustus@linuxhardware.org
> Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
> augustus@gentoo.org
> AIM: Augustus22
> 

Nice article, thanks Kris!  I'm about to hit the sack (I work nights),
so I've mostly just skimmed the performance section, and I'm rather
pleasantly surprised.

The Opterons are looking a lot better there than some of the other
reviews I've been reading.  The impression I've had was that in terms
of performance, Intel's had a significant lead since the Conroe came
out; although AMD's Barcelona is starting to close the gap (although I
had the impression Intel's Clovertown still leads).


Thanks,
Conway S. Smith

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[P.V.Anthony]

On this day, 10-November-2007 11:11 PM,  Conway S. Smith wrote:
> I'm in the planning stages of assembling a new box for myself @ home,
> and I'm debating if I want to go with AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon.  I've
> been focusing on Tyan motherboards, as I've heard here on the list that
> they've got really excellent Linux (and general) support.  In the past
> I've mostly gone w/ AMD CPUs, as they had a significantly better
> price:performance ratio, but it's been a few years since I last did a
> lot of shopping around, and I'm starting to think things may have
> changed.  I'm still leaning towards AMD Opterons (Barcelona), but I'm
> interested in hearing everyone else's opinions.

I know that AMD cpus are better but I had some problems with the onboard 
network chips. Most of the motherboards come with some Marvell, Broadcom 
or Nvidia network chips and these chips did not work for me.

I choose Intel chipset motherboards with Intel network because their 
network cards are really good.

The drivers in the kernel are really good for me.

P.V.Anthony
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Beso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3632 bytes --]

why not using the athlon x2 on am2 socket?  they work also with the non
registered memory (which is needed for opterons and is not an optional as it
is for athlons), which has a higher cost when compared to the non registered
one. the athlons have a smaller l2 cache, but the newer models (the be ones)
seem to have a better power consumption than opterons and old generation
athlons. in my vision, if you want to buy an opteron you might want to get
instead an athlon with increased speed and with more ram than in the opteron
case.
and i personally don't really like tyan. i prefer gigabyte. i hadn't used a
gigabyte product (video boards, mobos, wireless boards) that didn't worked
wery well with linux. and the new gigabyte hw is based on the coolpipe2
system which is very-very good and very silent. for what i've seen around a
good middle ranged gigabyte mobo supports dual channel ddr3 (1333) and ddr2,
am2 sockets till athlons quad and opterons dual, has 6 sata-II of 350mb/s,
and is around 70€. this will be my next board. i would also check later some
higher level mobos if i should have a greater dispo of money.
for video boards i'd suggest a gigabyte radeon hd2600pro 512 ddr2 or
gigabyte radeon hd2600xt 256 ddr3 for a middle ranged system or the gigabyte
radeon hd2900 xt 512 ddr3 for a high level system. the new fglrx works well
with these boards and there'll be an opensource driver soon (they're working
on the documentation that amd released recently).
for the system ram i'd choose ocz's 2gb - 2x1gb kit, for middle ranged
system or an 8gb ocz kit for high range desktop.
as for the disk i'd choose 2x400gb sata-II 8mb buffer with software raid and
lvm2 for middle range sytem or 2x360gb sata-II 16mb buffer in software raid
and lvm2 for higher level one.
at last i'd install a dual fan thermaltake cpu cooler instead a normal one
to keep the cpu temp lower than a normal fan would do. also the coolermaster
fans and dissipators work welly well.
the other components could be of any brand since they're not so important
and depend on what their cost is. a middle ranged desktop would so be around
500-600 € (no os installed) and a higher level one could reach also
1200-1300€ depending on how much stuff you put inside.

2007/11/10, Conway S. Smith <beolach@comcast.net>:
>
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
> "Kris Kersey (Augustus)" <augustus@linuxhardware.org> wrote:
> > Conway,
> >
> > While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review
> > on LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It
> > included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.
> > Here's the link:
> > http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread
> >
> > If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kris Kersey (Augustus)
> > LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
> > augustus@linuxhardware.org
> > Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
> > augustus@gentoo.org
> > AIM: Augustus22
> >
>
> Nice article, thanks Kris!  I'm about to hit the sack (I work nights),
> so I've mostly just skimmed the performance section, and I'm rather
> pleasantly surprised.
>
> The Opterons are looking a lot better there than some of the other
> reviews I've been reading.  The impression I've had was that in terms
> of performance, Intel's had a significant lead since the Conroe came
> out; although AMD's Barcelona is starting to close the gap (although I
> had the impression Intel's Clovertown still leads).
>
>
> Thanks,
> Conway S. Smith
>
>


-- 
dott. ing. beso

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4328 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Kris Kersey (Augustus)]

I would have a Barcelona review up but AMD didn't come through this last 
time on review samples.  It is important to keep in mind that 32-bit 
Windows performance is a big difference than 64-bit Linux performance. 
Keep this in mind when looking at 99% of the reviews out there.

Thanks,
Kris Kersey (Augustus)
LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
augustus@linuxhardware.org
Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
augustus@gentoo.org
AIM: Augustus22

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007, Conway S. Smith wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
> "Kris Kersey (Augustus)" <augustus@linuxhardware.org> wrote:
>> Conway,
>>
>> While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review
>> on LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It
>> included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.
>> Here's the link:
>> http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread
>>
>> If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kris Kersey (Augustus)
>> LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
>> augustus@linuxhardware.org
>> Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
>> augustus@gentoo.org
>> AIM: Augustus22
>>
>
> Nice article, thanks Kris!  I'm about to hit the sack (I work nights),
> so I've mostly just skimmed the performance section, and I'm rather
> pleasantly surprised.
>
> The Opterons are looking a lot better there than some of the other
> reviews I've been reading.  The impression I've had was that in terms
> of performance, Intel's had a significant lead since the Conroe came
> out; although AMD's Barcelona is starting to close the gap (although I
> had the impression Intel's Clovertown still leads).
>
>
> Thanks,
> Conway S. Smith
>
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Kris Kersey (Augustus)]

Not to start an argument but from personal experience I have never had a 
problem with NVIDIA or Broadcom chips.  Sometimes Marvell has not been as 
good though.

Thanks,
Kris Kersey (Augustus)
LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
augustus@linuxhardware.org
Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
augustus@gentoo.org
AIM: Augustus22

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, P.V.Anthony wrote:

> On this day, 10-November-2007 11:11 PM,  Conway S. Smith wrote:
>>  I'm in the planning stages of assembling a new box for myself @ home,
>>  and I'm debating if I want to go with AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon.  I've
>>  been focusing on Tyan motherboards, as I've heard here on the list that
>>  they've got really excellent Linux (and general) support.  In the past
>>  I've mostly gone w/ AMD CPUs, as they had a significantly better
>>  price:performance ratio, but it's been a few years since I last did a
>>  lot of shopping around, and I'm starting to think things may have
>>  changed.  I'm still leaning towards AMD Opterons (Barcelona), but I'm
>>  interested in hearing everyone else's opinions.
>
> I know that AMD cpus are better but I had some problems with the onboard 
> network chips. Most of the motherboards come with some Marvell, Broadcom or 
> Nvidia network chips and these chips did not work for me.
>
> I choose Intel chipset motherboards with Intel network because their network 
> cards are really good.
>
> The drivers in the kernel are really good for me.
>
> P.V.Anthony
> -- 
> gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
>
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Conway S. Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5102 bytes --]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:43:19 +0100
Beso <givemesugarr@gmail.com> wrote:
> why not using the athlon x2 on am2 socket?  they work also with the
> non registered memory (which is needed for opterons and is not an
> optional as it is for athlons), which has a higher cost when compared
> to the non registered one. the athlons have a smaller l2 cache, but
> the newer models (the be ones) seem to have a better power
> consumption than opterons and old generation athlons. in my vision,
> if you want to buy an opteron you might want to get instead an athlon
> with increased speed and with more ram than in the opteron case.

Well, I've been looking at the new Barcelona Opteron 2300 series,
which have 4 cores each & can be used in dual socket motherboards, for
a total of 8 cores in the system.  The 2 or 4 cores in an Athlon X2
system really would be sufficient for my needs, but then my current box
is still pretty much sufficient for my needs.  This new box I'm
planning is more about my wants, and I look at 8 cores & think "I want!"

About registered vs. unbuffered memory, my understanding is that for
systems w/ lots of memory (more than 4 GiB), the registers are a Good
Thing(tm). I don't really understand the electrical engineering behind
how memory & memory controllers work, so I don't claim to really grok
why registered memory is so important in systems w/ lots of RAM, but
since I'm planning on loading it with 8 or 16 GiB, I was planning on
going with registered anyway.

> and i personally don't really like tyan. i prefer gigabyte. i hadn't
> used a gigabyte product (video boards, mobos, wireless boards) that
> didn't worked wery well with linux. and the new gigabyte hw is based
> on the coolpipe2 system which is very-very good and very silent. for
> what i've seen around a good middle ranged gigabyte mobo supports
> dual channel ddr3 (1333) and ddr2, am2 sockets till athlons quad and
> opterons dual, has 6 sata-II of 350mb/s, and is around 70\u20ac. this
> will be my next board. i would also check later some higher level
> mobos if i should have a greater dispo of money.

Interesting, most of what I've heard about Tyan has been really good.
Is there something specific about Tyan that's been a problem for you?
I've also heard good things about Gigabyte, but Tyan really seemed to
stand out as excellent.  The two dual-socket F Gigabyte boards on
NewEgg are cheaper than the Tyans I've been considering, but
unfortunately they don't support the new Barcelona Opterons, and I'd
have to wait for new versions to be released.  But then the Tyan
motherboard I liked best is in the same situation, w/ a new
Barcelona-compatible version expected later this month.  I'll keep the
Gigabytes in mind.

> for video boards i'd suggest
> a gigabyte radeon hd2600pro 512 ddr2 or gigabyte radeon hd2600xt 256
> ddr3 for a middle ranged system or the gigabyte radeon hd2900 xt 512
> ddr3 for a high level system. the new fglrx works well with these
> boards and there'll be an opensource driver soon (they're working on
> the documentation that amd released recently).

I am thinking I'll probably go w/ an ATI video card, since I'm fairly
excited about the driver talk that's been going around.  Although one
thing I happened to find during my research for this box, nVidia is
significantly more energy efficient.
<http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000662.html>

> for the system ram i'd
> choose ocz's 2gb - 2x1gb kit, for middle ranged system or an 8gb ocz
> kit for high range desktop. as for the disk i'd choose 2x400gb
> sata-II 8mb buffer with software raid and lvm2 for middle range sytem
> or 2x360gb sata-II 16mb buffer in software raid and lvm2 for higher
> level one. at last i'd install a dual fan thermaltake cpu cooler
> instead a normal one to keep the cpu temp lower than a normal fan
> would do. also the coolermaster fans and dissipators work welly well.
> the other components could be of any brand since they're not so
> important and depend on what their cost is. a middle ranged desktop
> would so be around 500-600 \u20ac (no os installed) and a higher
> level one could reach also 1200-1300\u20ac depending on how much
> stuff you put inside.
> 

RAM I mentioned above.  Hard disk space was actually the main thing
that's prompting this new box, as I'm filling up all my current disks.
I eventually plan on filling the case w/ as many hard disks as it can
fit, probably at least 10+.  This box is going to be my home fileserver
for a long time to come.  But for starters I'm thinking I'll get 3x
1TiB in RAID5, and then grow the RAID as it fills up & drive prices
drop.  This will be my first time setting up RAID, I'm planning on
following the HOWTO_Setup_fully_crypted_Gentoo_on_EVMS in the
gentoo-wiki.

It is going to be quite expensive, but I'm sure my family & friends
won't mind me getting myself a Christmas present instead of them (j/k -
I've been saving for a while, and I can afford it along w/ holiday
gifts).


Thanks for the tips,
Conway S. Smith

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Beso]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3563 bytes --]

>
> Well, I've been looking at the new Barcelona Opteron 2300 series,
> which have 4 cores each & can be used in dual socket motherboards, for
> a total of 8 cores in the system.  The 2 or 4 cores in an Athlon X2
> system really would be sufficient for my needs, but then my current box
> is still pretty much sufficient for my needs.  This new box I'm
> planning is more about my wants, and I look at 8 cores & think "I want!"
>
> About registered vs. unbuffered memory, my understanding is that for
> systems w/ lots of memory (more than 4 GiB), the registers are a Good
> Thing(tm). I don't really understand the electrical engineering behind
> how memory & memory controllers work, so I don't claim to really grok
> why registered memory is so important in systems w/ lots of RAM, but
> since I'm planning on loading it with 8 or 16 GiB, I was planning on
> going with registered anyway.


in this case opterons are better...

>
> Interesting, most of what I've heard about Tyan has been really good.
> Is there something specific about Tyan that's been a problem for you?
> I've also heard good things about Gigabyte, but Tyan really seemed to
> stand out as excellent.  The two dual-socket F Gigabyte boards on
> NewEgg are cheaper than the Tyans I've been considering, but
> unfortunately they don't support the new Barcelona Opterons, and I'd
> have to wait for new versions to be released.  But then the Tyan
> motherboard I liked best is in the same situation, w/ a new
> Barcelona-compatible version expected later this month.  I'll keep the
> Gigabytes in mind.


i've had some problems with a tyan mobo  which has died in less than 1 week.
i've changed it and the second died in 3 days and after the second has died
i had returned the mobo and requested the money back and then went with a
gigabyte. thus, this wasn't in a high-level system, but on a middle one. so
i don't have any experience with high level systems.


> I am thinking I'll probably go w/ an ATI video card, since I'm fairly
> excited about the driver talk that's been going around.  Although one
> thing I happened to find during my research for this box, nVidia is
> significantly more energy efficient.
> <http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000662.html>


not true, for what i know. the new nvidias consume more power than radeons.
also, if you buy a gigabyte one which is totally passive its energy
consumption is very low. then ati has the powerplay wihch also works with
the fglrx, for what i know. if you need more info on the powerplay see how
it works on the amd's site.

RAM I mentioned above.  Hard disk space was actually the main thing
> that's prompting this new box, as I'm filling up all my current disks.
> I eventually plan on filling the case w/ as many hard disks as it can
> fit, probably at least 10+.  This box is going to be my home fileserver
> for a long time to come.  But for starters I'm thinking I'll get 3x
> 1TiB in RAID5, and then grow the RAID as it fills up & drive prices
> drop.  This will be my first time setting up RAID, I'm planning on
> following the HOWTO_Setup_fully_crypted_Gentoo_on_EVMS in the
> gentoo-wiki.
>
> It is going to be quite expensive, but I'm sure my family & friends
> won't mind me getting myself a Christmas present instead of them (j/k -
> I've been saving for a while, and I can afford it along w/ holiday
> gifts).


lucky you.... a similar system should go on around 4000-5000€....

ps. what would be its use?!?!

-- 
dott. ing. beso

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4561 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Bernhard Auzinger]

Am Samstag 10 November 2007 schrieb Kris Kersey (Augustus):
> Conway,
>
> While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review on
> LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It
> included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.  Here's
> the link:
> http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread
>
> If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.
>
> Thanks,
> Kris Kersey (Augustus)
> LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
> augustus@linuxhardware.org
> Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
> augustus@gentoo.org
> AIM: Augustus22

Why do you compare two systems with a different number of cores? 2x2Core 
athlon64 versus 2x4Core Core2Duo.

Rgds
Bernhard
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-amd64] Re: Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Duncan]

"Conway S. Smith" <beolach@comcast.net> posted
20071111053814.06ce20f3@mandalor.homelinux.net, excerpted below, on  Sun,
11 Nov 2007 05:38:14 -0700:

> Well, I've been looking at the new Barcelona Opteron 2300 series, which
> have 4 cores each & can be used in dual socket motherboards, for a total
> of 8 cores in the system.  The 2 or 4 cores in an Athlon X2 system
> really would be sufficient for my needs, but then my current box is
> still pretty much sufficient for my needs.  This new box I'm planning is
> more about my wants, and I look at 8 cores & think "I want!"

For general workstation use, including Gentoo, 4 cores should be about 
enough for now.  Same with 4 gig of memory.  I went with 8 gig memory, 
but if I had it to do over I'd stick with 4 gig and get the dual-cores 
sooner.

The more cores you get, the more things have to parallelize in ordered to 
use them.  It's coming, but really isn't there yet.  There are too many 
makefiles that haven't been designed with massive parallelization in mind.

Of course, there are applications where 8-core is useful.  Just not for 
general Gentoo desktop/workstation use, IMO.  A pair of 30" Apple Cinema 
(like 2900x1600 or some such, resolution) or comparable LCDs and a decent 
GPU (or set of GPUs) to run them seems better use of that sort of money, 
to me, and what I'm looking at for next upgrade after my eyes (lasik).

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Richard Freeman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1101 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bernhard Auzinger wrote:
> 
> Why do you compare two systems with a different number of cores? 2x2Core 
> athlon64 versus 2x4Core Core2Duo.
> 

I'm not sure that equal number of cores is the appropriate benchmark to
use.  I'd focus on equal total system cost, or equal total system
wattage, or equal total system size or something along those lines.
When I want to build a PC I don't want the best 2-core system I can get,
 I want the best system I can get for a given cost.  If I were in a
datacenter I might be more interested in power/heat since those have all
too high a cost of their own.  I really don't care who builds the best
CPU around - unless I'm just looking to spend up to $10k and I really
want the most power I can fit onto a motherboard.  Then again, I don't
drive a 911 either...  :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHN7FdG4/rWKZmVWkRAuL6AJ9pGVSJMRyu/xunIiHrPWTPIfBBQwCgkd5S
UISHDwtRBKzgtetsDg7ABzM=
=cVm4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 4101 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Conway S. Smith]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2543 bytes --]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:43:48 +0000 (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> "Conway S. Smith" <beolach@comcast.net> posted
> 20071111053814.06ce20f3@mandalor.homelinux.net, excerpted below, on
> Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:38:14 -0700:
> 
> > Well, I've been looking at the new Barcelona Opteron 2300 series,
> > which have 4 cores each & can be used in dual socket motherboards,
> > for a total of 8 cores in the system.  The 2 or 4 cores in an
> > Athlon X2 system really would be sufficient for my needs, but then
> > my current box is still pretty much sufficient for my needs.  This
> > new box I'm planning is more about my wants, and I look at 8 cores
> > & think "I want!"
> 
> For general workstation use, including Gentoo, 4 cores should be
> about enough for now.  Same with 4 gig of memory.  I went with 8 gig
> memory, but if I had it to do over I'd stick with 4 gig and get the
> dual-cores sooner.
> 

The thing is, I'm really not much of an upgrader - at least, not
replacement-type upgrades, like CPUs.  I'd rather get 4 cores now,
instead of getting 2 cores & later upgrading to 4, because then I'd
have the 2 core CPUs lying around, and much as I might think that I'd
find some use for them, my experience has been that they'd just end up
in a box (cardboard, not computer) gathering dust.  And as I've been
pricing things, I've been rather impressed w/ how the 4 core Barcelonas
are priced compared w/ similarly clocked 2 core Santa Rosas.

Memory, on the other hand, is easier to upgrade just by adding
additional sticks, so I might just start w/ 4 GiB & plan on adding more
later.

> The more cores you get, the more things have to parallelize in
> ordered to use them.  It's coming, but really isn't there yet.  There
> are too many makefiles that haven't been designed with massive
> parallelization in mind.
> 
> Of course, there are applications where 8-core is useful.  Just not
> for general Gentoo desktop/workstation use, IMO.  A pair of 30" Apple
> Cinema (like 2900x1600 or some such, resolution) or comparable LCDs
> and a decent GPU (or set of GPUs) to run them seems better use of
> that sort of money, to me, and what I'm looking at for next upgrade
> after my eyes (lasik).
> 

I actually already have a Samsung 305T 30" monitor, that's very similar
to the Apple Cinema, but slightly cheaper & better response time.  And
it (just the one) was more expensive than I expect I'll be shelling out
for the 2x4 core CPUs + motherboard.


Thanks,
Conway S. Smith

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Kris Kersey (Augustus)]

Because, at the time, that was the best available from both AMD and Intel. 
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the prices were similar at the time.  Notice 
that I was careful to also do some core vs. core benchmarks so that you 
could possibly compare dual-core Xeons and look forward to Barcelona.

Thanks,
Kris Kersey (Augustus)
LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
augustus@linuxhardware.org
Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
augustus@gentoo.org
AIM: Augustus22

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, Bernhard Auzinger wrote:

> Am Samstag 10 November 2007 schrieb Kris Kersey (Augustus):
>> Conway,
>>
>> While it doesn't include Barcelona, you probably would find my review on
>> LinuxHardware.org very useful in your decision making process.  It
>> included the latest Xeon and Opteron processors using Tyan boards.  Here's
>> the link:
>> http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1414204&mode=thread
>>
>> If you have any other questions, I'll be happy to help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kris Kersey (Augustus)
>> LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
>> augustus@linuxhardware.org
>> Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
>> augustus@gentoo.org
>> AIM: Augustus22
>
> Why do you compare two systems with a different number of cores? 2x2Core
> athlon64 versus 2x4Core Core2Duo.
>
> Rgds
> Bernhard
> -- 
> gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Bob Sanders]

Kris Kersey (Augustus), mused, then expounded:
> Not to start an argument but from personal experience I have never had a 
> problem with NVIDIA or Broadcom chips.  Sometimes Marvell has not been as 
> good though.
>

To add to Augustus' comment, I've used a lot of Broadcom and Intel network
chips with a number of different linux kernels, and haven't had any real
issues, other than soem unexplained latency differences on nodes in a cluster
with the Intel chips.  I haven't had the ability to try the same with the
Broadcom chips, so can't comment on their performance in the same conditions.

That said, Intel just rev'ed their network chips to deal with issues.  And the
new chips use the igb driver that's not in older Linux kernels.  So just
a head's up.

And at home, my personal system is running an Nvidia chipset with no issues
for my personal usage.

Bob

> Thanks,
> Kris Kersey (Augustus)
> LinuxHardware.org Site Manager
> augustus@linuxhardware.org
> Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer
> augustus@gentoo.org
> AIM: Augustus22
>
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, P.V.Anthony wrote:
>
>> On this day, 10-November-2007 11:11 PM,  Conway S. Smith wrote:
>>>  I'm in the planning stages of assembling a new box for myself @ home,
>>>  and I'm debating if I want to go with AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon.  I've
>>>  been focusing on Tyan motherboards, as I've heard here on the list that
>>>  they've got really excellent Linux (and general) support.  In the past
>>>  I've mostly gone w/ AMD CPUs, as they had a significantly better
>>>  price:performance ratio, but it's been a few years since I last did a
>>>  lot of shopping around, and I'm starting to think things may have
>>>  changed.  I'm still leaning towards AMD Opterons (Barcelona), but I'm
>>>  interested in hearing everyone else's opinions.
>>
>> I know that AMD cpus are better but I had some problems with the onboard 
>> network chips. Most of the motherboards come with some Marvell, Broadcom 
>> or Nvidia network chips and these chips did not work for me.
>>
>> I choose Intel chipset motherboards with Intel network because their 
>> network cards are really good.
>>
>> The drivers in the kernel are really good for me.
>>
>> P.V.Anthony
>> -- 
>> gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list
>>
>>
>>
> -- 
> gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list
>

-- 
-  
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] Planning a new box - AMD Opteron or Intel Xeon?

[Bob Sanders]

Conway S. Smith, mused, then expounded:
> 
> About registered vs. unbuffered memory, my understanding is that for
> systems w/ lots of memory (more than 4 GiB), the registers are a Good
> Thing(tm). I don't really understand the electrical engineering behind
> how memory & memory controllers work, so I don't claim to really grok
> why registered memory is so important in systems w/ lots of RAM, but
> since I'm planning on loading it with 8 or 16 GiB, I was planning on
> going with registered anyway.
>

Registered memory is needed when the system is running 24x7 and when
a large number of DIMMS are used due to trace lengths to the DIMMS.

Adding registers causes power comsuption to go up as each DIMM now
has around 5 W of standing power, even when the memory is not in use.
It also results in a performance hit as the registers cause more latency.

Whether registered memory (fo FB-DIMMs for the Intel side) are required,
is really up to you and your choices.  However, without a really good
memory diag that runs on the os, along with logging the sel/event errors
and knowing that the running bios is actually logging memory errors
properly, registered memory is close to worthless for the majority
of home builders.  Because without the proper tools, you don't know
that your memory is functioning properly.  And the more DIMMs you
use the more errors you'll see (assuming the bios is reporting them)
and the more DIMMs you'll go through during the burn-in period, until
you finally get a stable system.
 
> 
> Interesting, most of what I've heard about Tyan has been really good.
> Is there something specific about Tyan that's been a problem for you?
> I've also heard good things about Gigabyte, but Tyan really seemed to
> stand out as excellent.  The two dual-socket F Gigabyte boards on
> NewEgg are cheaper than the Tyans I've been considering, but
> unfortunately they don't support the new Barcelona Opterons, and I'd
> have to wait for new versions to be released.  But then the Tyan
> motherboard I liked best is in the same situation, w/ a new
> Barcelona-compatible version expected later this month.  I'll keep the
> Gigabytes in mind.
>

Server motherboards tend to be better tested and have less bleeding edge
hardware - I had to compile the Agere GigE driver for the ECS motherboard
I had, before I grew tired of the other flakeyness and swapped in a Tyan
server motherboard.
 
> 
> RAM I mentioned above.  Hard disk space was actually the main thing
> that's prompting this new box, as I'm filling up all my current disks.
> I eventually plan on filling the case w/ as many hard disks as it can
> fit, probably at least 10+.  This box is going to be my home fileserver
> for a long time to come.  But for starters I'm thinking I'll get 3x
> 1TiB in RAID5, and then grow the RAID as it fills up & drive prices
> drop.  This will be my first time setting up RAID, I'm planning on
> following the HOWTO_Setup_fully_crypted_Gentoo_on_EVMS in the
> gentoo-wiki.
>

After spending significant time with both software RAID5 and hardware 
RAID1 and RADI5, and trashing both in ways all the docs say is not 
possible, I find RAID is very oversold for it's supposed benefits.  
I'd like to offer some suggestions (which are worth exactly what 
you're paying to see them) -

   - Make the file server a sperate box, do not run your desktop on
     the same box.  You'll trash it one way or another at some point.
     Also, that allows you to power down the the desktop and leave
     the file server running, should you feel wasting electricity
     is justified.  And the fileserver can use less powerful cpus.

   - Minimize the number of drives.  The more drives, the sooner the
     box will fail.  Stay away from RAID if it's possible.  Use something
     like LVM and individual drives - Google around for Linux video
     recorder for some experiences in this area.

   - Don't buy drives from the same lot.  If one fails then there is a
     significantly high chance another will fail at the same time.  If
     you really insist on a RAID above 0 or 1, buy double the number
     of drives and expect only half of them will actually work in
     the target RAID after you burn them in for 2 weeks, including
     power cycling.

   - Statistically, RAID 0/1 will provide greater reliability, due
     to having only 2 drives, thus providing higher reliability.  More
     than 2 drives starts to lower reliability, requireing the need
     to have an ECC drive (RAID5) or two (RAID6).  For better reliability,
     one needs to go to SAS drives, but then one has to use a better
     controller than is found on most motherboards, thus increasing the
     cost and parts count, lowering the overall reliabilty, requiring
     more drives - hot spares.

   - If you intend on ever moving the drives from one system to another,
     stay far away from hardware RAID.  It will bite you big time on this
     as the raid must be re-integrated each time the drives move.  Even
     pulling the drives out and re-installing.  But it is dependant upon
     the specific firmware used in the specific RAID card.  And that
     firmware varies even though the exact same RAID chip is implemented.

   - Get to know you're recovery software and procedures.  RAIDs will fail.
     Indeed, cause the failures (or, like me use a crappy motherboard that
     will cause failures).  I've re-built my running RAID more times
     than I care to name, and in my case, am damn glad I was was running
     XFS so I could recover from the failures.  But for most people XFS
     is a poor choice - see the previously mentioned LVM + XFS Linux
     video recorder.

Given that there are now 1 TB drives, the need for a RAID at home is becoming
less and less.

Bob
-- 
-  
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list