GamePC have posted their AMD and Intel CPU Comparsion that looks at Server chips in the shape of AMD's new Opteron 248 and Intel's new Xeon 3.2 GHz/1MB processors!
When looking at these two CPU's on paper, both have advantages when it comes to data serving. For example, the Opteron's integrated DDR memory controller will decrease latency to system memory, while its Hyper-Transport linked bridge chips will allow for more bandwidth with populated PCI-X bus connections. On the Intel side, the Xeon has a massive 1.5 MB of on-die cache, which runs at full 3.2 GHz clock rate, 1 GHz faster compared to the fastest Opteron's cache speeds.
In addition, Intel has quite a lot more experience with high-bandwidth PCI-X connectivity compared to AMD does, which could come into play when in terms of network and storage throughput. In addition, the Xeons have Hyper-Threading technology, which may not do much for desktop performance (for the Xeons, not the Pentium 4), but reportedly helps server performance. We'll see about that.
High-End CPU?s from AMD and Intel Compared
When looking at these two CPU's on paper, both have advantages when it comes to data serving. For example, the Opteron's integrated DDR memory controller will decrease latency to system memory, while its Hyper-Transport linked bridge chips will allow for more bandwidth with populated PCI-X bus connections. On the Intel side, the Xeon has a massive 1.5 MB of on-die cache, which runs at full 3.2 GHz clock rate, 1 GHz faster compared to the fastest Opteron's cache speeds.
In addition, Intel has quite a lot more experience with high-bandwidth PCI-X connectivity compared to AMD does, which could come into play when in terms of network and storage throughput. In addition, the Xeons have Hyper-Threading technology, which may not do much for desktop performance (for the Xeons, not the Pentium 4), but reportedly helps server performance. We'll see about that.
High-End CPU?s from AMD and Intel Compared
