EM64T vs. AMD64

[BinarySynapse]

the opteron 2350 is 450
the xeon 5345 is 560 =p
even with the win2k3 server, does it cost more then 3k for a license? i thought it was around $800

Depends on how many users will connect to the server and then there's the upgrade to Win2k8

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

Depends on how many users will connect to the server and then there's the upgrade to Win2k8

True,

IMO after all the software, the intel machine should cost more by a fair bit, memory prices alone are pretty chunky on those beasts

 

[E7130]

the opteron 2350 is 450
the xeon 5345 is 560 =p
even with the win2k3 server, does it cost more then 3k for a license? i thought it was around $800

No, the Xeon is only $40 more than the Opteron. And the 2k3 license comes with 5 CALs @ $800. We already have CALs for everyone. And am I mistaken, but I thought If you are replacing a server would it be fare to say you can just transfer the CALs over?

 

[E7130]

True,

IMO after all the software, the intel machine should cost more by a fair bit, memory prices alone are pretty chunky on those beasts

I'm I missing something, Newegg has standard DIMMS and FB-DIMMs at the same price? $130 for 2 GB. We are only going to have 8GB total first.

 

[E7130]

True,

IMO after all the software, the intel machine should cost more by a fair bit, memory prices alone are pretty chunky on those beasts

Ok, I think something is missing. Company A's server build is $9000+, Company B's server is $6,200 or so, plus Win2k3 = $7,000, plus 2k8 upgrade = $7,500.

Server A = $9,198
======
Opteron 2350 x2
Tyan
8 GB DDR2 667
74GB 10,000RPM x2 (RAID 1) - BOOT
36GB 10,000RPM x2 (RAID 1) - PAGE FILE
150GB 10,000RPM x6 (RAID 10) - DATA ARRAY
Supermicro 3u 8367q chassis
800 watt redundant psu
Win2k3 Server with free upgrade to Win2k8

Server B = $7,500
======
Xeon 5345 x2
Supermicro X7DB3 Dual Xeon MB
8 GB DDR2 667 (expandable up to 32GB)
74GB 10,000RPM x2 (RAID 1) - BOOT
36GB 10,000RPM x2 (RAID 1) - PAGE FILE
150GB 10,000RPM x6 (RAID 10) - DATA ARRAY
Supermicro 3u 8367q chassis
800 watt redundant psu
Win2k3 Server 5 CALs (already have tons)
Upgrade to Win2k8

Now from a business standpoint (where money matters) Server B looks good to me.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

I'm I missing something, Newegg has standard DIMMS and FB-DIMMs at the same price? $130 for 2 GB. We are only going to have 8GB total first.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134333 - 1GB DDR2 667 ECC $31.99 x 8 = ~ $255

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820146585 1GB DDR2 667 FB-ECC $65.49 x 8 = ~$523

I dunno why the price is so different in your builds, the only thing I can think of is motherboard?

assuming all other hardware is the same

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117118 Xeon $485
http://www.ncixus.com/products/26158/OS2350WAL4BGEWOF/AMD/ Opteron $404


AMD
-$270 for ram diff
-$160 for CPU diff

So unless you went all out with the AMD motherboard, you should have a difference of $430 in favour of the AMD build
on performance, u can check Anandtech, they had a review of a Barc vs 5345 i believe and see how they do in tests vs one another, another cost benefit is future mem upgrades for the opteron 0.0

 

[ChronoReverse]

What about warranty and servicing contracts?

 

[E7130]

The IT consulting company is 3 years parts and labor on hardware. They would charge to install anything. 5 years on the hard drives.

Systemax would be the same except they would charge to install something if it was that bad.

I don't get some of the posts. The IT company quoted $9,200, so is that better than Systemax at $7,500????? For the exact same hardware config?

 

[E7130]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134333 - 1GB DDR2 667 ECC $31.99 x 8 = ~ $255

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820146585 1GB DDR2 667 FB-ECC $65.49 x 8 = ~$523

I dunno why the price is so different in your builds, the only thing I can think of is motherboard?

assuming all other hardware is the same

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117118 Xeon $485
http://www.ncixus.com/products/26158/OS2350WAL4BGEWOF/AMD/ Opteron $404


AMD
-$270 for ram diff
-$160 for CPU diff

So unless you went all out with the AMD motherboard, you should have a difference of $430 in favour of the AMD build
on performance, u can check Anandtech, they had a review of a Barc vs 5345 i believe and see how they do in tests vs one another, another cost benefit is future mem upgrades for the opteron 0.0

5345 beat the opteron. And I am not personally building this server. It has already been designed by two companies with two different prices. That is why I am asking can the Intel server handle and out perform or at least perform the same as the Opteron. Purchasing the Intel Machine would save us $1500. So, I don't know what you are talking about coming out ahead with the AMD by $430?

So are you saying we should go with the more expensive AMD server?

 

[fluxion]

he's saying they overpriced the amd system, that it should be cheaper $490 cheaper than the intel one

i think there's a markup factor that people aren't taking into account here. people dont generally build servers for free.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

5345 beat the opteron. And I am not personally building this server. It has already been designed by two companies with two different prices. That is why I am asking can the Intel server handle and out perform or at least perform the same as the Opteron. Purchasing the Intel Machine would save us $1500. So, I don't know what you are talking about coming out ahead with the AMD by $430?

So are you saying we should go with the more expensive AMD server?

I'm saying price out the AMD machine on your own, from working @ a computer store that also does servers, the mark up is pretty big, making $900 on a $4000 server type big.

if you price out both AMD and Intel Machines then you should get ~4-500 chaeper on the AMD machine.
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091&p=9
sql? the Opteron is faster then the 5435 it beats it most of the time 0.0

 

[mito]

yes

 

[E7130]

I'm saying price out the AMD machine on your own, from working @ a computer store that also does servers, the mark up is pretty big, making $900 on a $4000 server type big.

if you price out both AMD and Intel Machines then you should get ~4-500 chaeper on the AMD machine.
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3091&p=9
sql? the Opteron is faster then the 5435 it beats it most of the time 0.0

Yeah I get it (I build gaming rigs and home servers a lot so I to play the mark up game, but I am competitive) and have, I told my supervisor that the AMD server (hardware) was around $4,500 if I built it, however with my limited time and she feels more comfortable having a company to look at for when their is hardware issues she opted for the ladder. Then with the OS it would be $5,200. I still think that a $3000+ labor/profit cost is a little out there.

I ordered the Xeon system. Right now we have sql running on a AMD x64 2.8Ghz system with 4GB ram (single core) meaning that with whatever server is replacing it will be a ton better in performance, so I know that SQL is memory intrusive, however the margin is not so great for the Opteron vs. Xeon that it justifies and extra $2k.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

Oh, ok. Yeah I get it. I know, I told my supervisor that the AMD server (hardware) was around $4,500. Then with the OS it would be $5,200. I still think that a $3000+ labor/profit cost is a little out there.

I ordered the Xeon system.

i woudln't put it past a company, specially if they're servicing your machine for the period.

btw why did u go with the xeon, the barc is cheaper and faster in the tests that show off SQL.

 

[E7130]

ik woudln't put it past a company, specially if they're servicing your machine for the period.

btw why did u go with the xeon, the barc is cheaper and faster in the tests that show off SQL.

The IT company's AMD build was over $9K and the Xeon was $6K. How is the AMD cheaper? Are you saying that I should have Systemax quote an AMD server like they did for the Xeon? And the IT Co. would not come up and install the parts they would send us them. We would be charged (a lot) for them to come up and install say...a mobo. The IT company is only warrantying the parts not labor, they will charge $140 per hour to service the server.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

The IT company's AMD build was over $9K and the Xeon was $6K. How is the AMD cheaper? Are you saying that I should have Systemax quote an AMD server like they did for the Xeon? And the IT Co. would not come up and install the parts they would send us them. We would be charged (a lot) for them to come up and install say...a mobo. The IT company is only warrantying the parts not labor, they will charge $140 per hour to service the server.

well then someone gave you a retarded price, Go to new egg, price out each system yourself, the AMD one will be cheaper. the Xeon CPU costs more, the RAM costs more, the motherboard(not sure about) the rest is the same, so how does the intel machine come out cheaper? some serious error on their end in pricing.

 

[E7130]

well then someone gave you a retarded price, Go to new egg, price out each system yourself, the AMD one will be cheaper. the Xeon CPU costs more, the RAM costs more, the motherboard(not sure about) the rest is the same, so how does the intel machine come out cheaper? some serious error on their end in pricing.

I know, has I have stated many times before I have priced the server out on NEWEGG and that is why I thought ACE Net's price was a bit much, i.e. $9K. So, I called Systemax and they quoted me $6K for a Quad Xeon setup. And ACE Net is a top skilled company, but they are pricey, and will charge for labor and travel ($140 per hour)

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

http://www.ncixus.com/products/26157/OS2350WAL4BGE/AMD/

here is the cpu $403 x 2 = $806
and my new egg shopping cart
diff psu probably since u didnt list, and I couldn't get a price on the case you wanted so I picked something Similar
All together its $3600 for the AMD system w/o software so + software its $4400, I'd say the intel system isn't far off around $4800
not sure where your price came from

 

[E7130]

http://www.ncixus.com/products/26157/OS2350WAL4BGE/AMD/

here is the cpu $403 x 2 = $806
and my new egg shopping cart
diff psu probably since u didnt list, and I couldn't get a price on the case you wanted so I picked something Similar
All together its $3600 for the AMD system w/o software so + software its $4400, I'd say the intel system isn't far off around $4800
not sure where your price came from

Man, that is the same price I am telling you about I HAVE PRICED IT BEFORE ON NEWEGG WITH ACE NETS SPECS AND CAME OUT TO 4K-4.5. I priced it on newegg and everything and came up with the same as you. ACE Net added 4-5,000 dollars to the price tag.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

The IT company's AMD build was over $9K and the Xeon was $6K. How is the AMD cheaper? Are you saying that I should have Systemax quote an AMD server like they did for the Xeon? And the IT Co. would not come up and install the parts they would send us them. We would be charged (a lot) for them to come up and install say...a mobo. The IT company is only warrantying the parts not labor, they will charge $140 per hour to service the server.

Man, that is the same price I am telling you about I HAVE PRICED IT BEFORE ON NEWEGG WITH ACE NETS SPECS AND CAME OUT TO 4K-4.5. I priced it on newegg and everything and came up with the same as you. ACE Net added 4-5,000 dollars to the price tag.

then why would you post the comment above? you're asking how isthe AMD cheaper, obviously it is cheaper, it is faster too.
you said multiple times that the INTEL machine was cheaper, you even said you will save $1500 by going with intel.

either you just like contradicting yourself or you were discussing something different.

and obviously to get a GOOD comparison in price, you should get the quote from the same Co, IE Sysmax with their intel machine, which is still a bit over priced, why are you ordering from these co and paying them a premium when you're going to build it anyways?

 

[E7130]

The IT company's AMD build was over $9K and the Xeon was $6K. How is the AMD cheaper? Are you saying that I should have Systemax quote an AMD server like they did for the Xeon? And the IT Co. would not come up and install the parts they would send us them. We would be charged (a lot) for them to come up and install say...a mobo. The IT company is only warrantying the parts not labor, they will charge $140 per hour to service the server.

then why would you post the comment above? you're asking how is the AMD cheaper, obviously it is cheaper, it is faster too.
you said multiple times that the INTEL machine was cheaper, you even said you will save $1500 by going with intel.

either you just like contradicting yourself or you were discussing something different.

and obviously to get a GOOD comparison in price, you should get the quote from the same Co, IE Sysmax with their intel machine, which is still a bit over priced, why are you ordering from these co and paying them a premium when you're going to build it anyways?

I do not believe I have contradicted myself, man. I think you are confused.

then why would you post the comment above?

Because brother I priced it out myself when I got the quote, I thought ACE NET's 9K quote was too much for an AMD Server. Did you not read through all my posts? I said that so many times now.. I PRICED IT JUST TO COMPARE TO THE 9K QUOTE I HAD. THAT IS IT

you're asking how is the AMD cheaper, obviously it is cheaper, it is faster too.

Your right, in SQL it has a small advantage because it scales better, but in the rest it doesn't and overall the intel was the better choice for performance going off of reviews, not my own experience in testing.

you even said you will save $1500 by going with intel.

Yes, I would by not going with ACE NET.

why are you ordering from these co and paying them a premium when you're going to build it anyways?

I never said I was going to build it, never, I said I priced the server out myself when I receive the first quote to do a compare and contrast to how much they were over charging. I could build it myself no problem and save on the premium, However, my supervisor as the last word and she wanted to go with an outside company on this one because I don't have a great deal of free time. **only today do I because our town is having a Neewollah party.

You are right about one thing, I should have asked Systemax to Quote a Opteron server.

 

[Wolf-R1]

I'll never understand why people don't do a bit of their own legwork and just Google the damn thing. This took me all of two seconds and has most, if not all of the answers within.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64

It has been said, and I cannot find the benchmarks, that Intel's implementation of the x86-64 instruction set is not as fast as AMD's however the result is negligible in the end. My guess would be because of a 'tweak' that Intel probably insisted on implementing to make it more 'Intel'. Furthermore things may have changed since this instruction set has been out for a while and, as noted toward the lower half of this Wiki page, both sides have made their own modifications to the x86-64 instruction set.

 

[E7130]

I'll never understand why people don't do a bit of their own legwork and just Google the damn thing. This took me all of two seconds and has most, if not all of the answers within.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64

It has been said, and I cannot find the benchmarks, that Intel's implementation of the x86-64 instruction set is not as fast as AMD's however the result is negligible in the end. My guess would be because of a 'tweak' that Intel probably insisted on implementing to make it more 'Intel'. Furthermore things may have changed since this instruction set has been out for a while and, as noted toward the lower half of this Wiki page, both sides have made their own modifications to the x86-64 instruction set.

What, are you implying I didn't read that page already?, I have many times, so I have done the, as you say "damn" leg work. I think you missed the point of the thread, the thread was about what an AMD fanboy was trying to sell me on. That Intel does not have a true 64-bit cpu and it just has extended capabilities to operate as 64-bit. Where the AMD as true native 64-bit architecture. Basically Intel emulates while AMD does the real deal.

Intel's implementation of the x86-64 instruction set is not as fast as AMD's however the result is negligible in the end.

Your right, but I think that was only the case for the first run of EM64T equipped processors like the Pentium D and 4.

 

[Scali2]

They pulled the 64-bit engine from all their games except for Lost Coast, as far as I know. After a recent update my Half-Life 2 was no longer in 64-bit, and I've never had Episode One and Two in 64-bit at all. But considering the poor performance, you're not missing much.
The 64-bit versions did load levels quite a bit quicker than the 32-bit ones though... but the framerate was just poor. Back to the drawing board.

Well, funny enough I got an update today, and the 64-bit version of Half-Life 2 is back in my Steam account.
Episode One and Two are still 32-bit though.
It doesn't seem like they actually improved the engine. I think they just made a mistake or something. I lost the 64-bit version when that new in-game community thing was added. The update I got now was also related to that community thing.

 

[Scali2]

Your right, but I think that was only the case for the first run of EM64T equipped processors like the Pentium D and 4.

He's not right at all.
If anything, the Pentiums have a relatively better 64-bit mode than the Core2 (probably because Pentiums are quite inefficient by nature, and have more 'headroom' for extra performance... You could say: the faster the architecture, the harder it is to make it go faster).

I posted this CPU-intensive realtime 3d visualization routine here a while ago:
http://bohemiq.scali.eu.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25

The difference between 32-bit and 64-bit mode is the largest on Pentium 4/D. Ironically enough the Athlon64 is the worst (probably because their caches aren't fast and quick enough to run faster in 64-bit mode, since it requires a bit more storage and bandwidth).
Now if the EM64T in Pentiums was bad, they could never get such a leap in performance in this routine. But actually, EM64T seems to close quite a bit of the performance gap between the Pentium and Athlon64/Core2.
I'm just sick and tired of people slagging off the Pentium, while it actually has the best 64-bit mode of all three x64-architectures on the market. Thing is just that the performance is lower than that of Athlons and Core2's in general, so even with the extra gain in 64-bit it's still slower.
Likewise, an Athlon64 may gain more than a Core2 in some cases (although in my own code it's even slower than in 32-bit mode, despite me having pulled every trick that I could think of to make the code run as fast as possible in 64-bit mode), but Core2 is so much faster, that it's not relevant.

Edit: In case you were wondering if my code would be biased for Pentium... I wrote the original 32-bit code on my Athlon XP 1800+. Then I developed the 64-bit multithreaded variation (really only a few minor tweaks to the basic routine) on my Core2 Duo. So I never actually used a Pentium, let alone optimized for it, consciously or subconsciously. The groundwork was actually done on an Athlon, which has very similar performance characteristics to the Athlon64, so if anything, I'd think my code would suit the Athlon64 architecture pretty well, since I tuned the original version on an Athlon.

 

[E7130]

He's not right at all.
If anything, the Pentiums have a relatively better 64-bit mode than the Core2 (probably because Pentiums are quite inefficient by nature, and have more 'headroom' for extra performance... You could say: the faster the architecture, the harder it is to make it go faster).

I posted this CPU-intensive realtime 3d visualization routine here a while ago:
http://bohemiq.scali.eu.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25

The difference between 32-bit and 64-bit mode is the largest on Pentium 4/D. Ironically enough the Athlon64 is the worst (probably because their caches aren't fast and quick enough to run faster in 64-bit mode, since it requires a bit more storage and bandwidth).
Now if the EM64T in Pentiums was bad, they could never get such a leap in performance in this routine. But actually, EM64T seems to close quite a bit of the performance gap between the Pentium and Athlon64/Core2.
I'm just sick and tired of people slagging off the Pentium, while it actually has the best 64-bit mode of all three x64-architectures on the market. Thing is just that the performance is lower than that of Athlons and Core2's in general, so even with the extra gain in 64-bit it's still slower.
Likewise, an Athlon64 may gain more than a Core2 in some cases (although in my own code it's even slower than in 32-bit mode, despite me having pulled every trick that I could think of to make the code run as fast as possible in 64-bit mode), but Core2 is so much faster, that it's not relevant.

I appreciate that input. That is why I love this site, I learn more every day.

 

[SLee]

i woudln't put it past a company, specially if they're servicing your machine for the period.

btw why did u go with the xeon, the barc is cheaper and faster in the tests that show off SQL.

MySQL benchmarks is not a test that shows off SQL.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

MySQL benchmarks is not a test that shows off SQL.

ok SQL performance :O?
I dunno I don't use servers much just put em together and run basic ones ^^

 

[SLee]

ok SQL performance :O?

If you go from Anand's benchmarks, the ideal processor is a Woodcrest. MySQL works well enough for many applications, but it doesn't scale particularly well past a few CPUs, especially compared to the enterprise database software.