can any one tell me the processing speed differences?[views:2474][posts:29]_______________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:04pm - the_reverend ""] I'm thinking of upgrading the RTTP server. can someone tell me the speed difference between these two? #1 Conroe 3040 Dual Core - 1.86 GHz Dell PowerEdge 840 1066 MHz FSB 1 GB DDR2 RAM 250GB SATA HDD #2 Intel \ 2.4 GHz \ Pentium 4 Generic \ 1024 MB \ DDR 266 Unknown \ Onboard \ IDE Seagate \ 80GB:IDE:7200RPM Barracuda \ ST380011a Western Digital \ 80GB:IDE:7200RPM \ WD800JB |
| ____________________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:12pm - FuckIsMySignature ""] 11 is louder than 10 |
| __________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:13pm - ZenErik ""] What is Conroe? |
| ___________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:43pm - dertoxia ""] definately the dual core |
| ___________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:45pm - powerkok ""] fsb on #2 is unknown? |
| _______________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:48pm - the_reverend ""] it's DDR 266.. so I'm guessing a 266MHZ bus. the reason I'm worndering is cause I got an upgrade offer on my RTTP server. the new server is #1, the old (current) server is #2.. I would need to add 2 more banner ads per month to cover the extra cost. |
| ___________________________________ [Apr 16,2007 11:58pm - powerkok ""] if it is 266 vs 1066 fsb, that is gonna be a huge diff. |
| _________________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:03am - ArrowHead NLI ""] ZenErik said:What is Conroe? Conroe is the name for the newer dual core processors. |
| _______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:07am - the_reverend ""] I'm looking for some benchmarks here folks |
| _________________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:07am - ArrowHead NLI ""] The conroe is faster than the pentium 4, in the sense that it will be processing two streams of data independently where the pentium 4 would only do a single. However, with smaller chunks of data, the multitasking will be less evident and the 2.4 ghz will be quicker than 1.86. You'll get faster bus speeds from the DDR2 memory, but it doesn't list how much. It could be anywhere from 533 to 1066. Finally, for data access you yourself have said that the ATA drive will be much faster than IDE. |
| _______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:10am - the_reverend ""] right now with the RTTP server this is the issue: VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 566m 224m 2868 S 37.2% 22.3% 9453:54 mysqld the SQL server is the pig. |
| _______________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:12am - Mess ""] ca ca ca ca cocaine! |
| _______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:12am - the_reverend ""] and when someone's doing a search on the body of the discussion board VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 566m 224m 2868 S 68.2 22.3 9454:37 mysqld |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:20am - denim ""] Raw horsepower comparison: http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/03/26/the_gigahertz_battle/page13.html I sez: Significantly faster because you're running LAMP, so having two cores is a big win. One can crank along parsing PHP while another processes your SQL queries. The raw comparison above is with both at 2.4 GHz, I interpret that as getting you about a 30% performance boost in a single-threaded app, but probably more like 60% in this case. SQL stuff is particularly memory-bandwidth sensitive, so it might be even more than that given the disparity in memory speed. |
| __________________________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 11:45am - the_taste_of_cigarettes ""] Where the fuck is Alex on this?? |
| __________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 12:42pm - sxealex ""] http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?mod...=33&model1=432&model2=443&chart=181 sick and asleep |
| __________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 12:45pm - sxealex ""] why dont u just add a "nice" thing to the search script |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 1:50pm - the_reverend ""] that makes no sense. |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 1:55pm - sxealex ""] it makes sense. if u just made it so that when there was a search it changed the priority of mysqld. and then changed it back when it was done. |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 1:55pm - the_reverend ""] "hey, I'm writing a paper for school. can you nice whenever I type the letter a?" |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 1:57pm - sxealex ""] ya know you could just run a second instanace of mysqld just for searches. |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 1:59pm - sxealex ""] and technically you could everytime you type the letter a. |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 2:01pm - the_reverend ""] you don't know how mysqld works do you... that would require an extra 600MB of RAM too. I wouldn't just have to keep 2 different mysqld's, but everything I did would take twice as long cause I would have to update 2 different databases and if I didn't do it that way, then they would still be accessing the same exact memory on the disk so it would be the same bottleneck, but with 2x the RAM used and 2x the calls done. |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 2:16pm - sxealex ""] ok my bad i thought 2 servers could update one database. but its not really supported i guess. |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 2:20pm - the_reverend ""] two servers CAN update one database. but since there is an issue with the speed of accessing that one single database, two people grabbing for something is even slower than 1 person grabbing at something. |
| _________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 3:20pm - sxealex ""] oh yea its one file... der |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 17,2007 3:22pm - the_reverend ""] 3 files, but yes |
| ______________________________ [Apr 18,2007 7:15am - Mess ""] [img] |
| _______________________________ [Apr 18,2007 10:32am - Mess ""] [img] |
| ______________________________________ [Apr 19,2007 5:47pm - the_reverend ""] ordered. but only with 1GB RAM. 2GB is like $375 or more more |