[CentOS] [OT] Memory Models and Multi/Virtual-Cores -- WAS: 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.comSat Jun 25 19:53:13 UTC 2005
- Previous message: [CentOS] [OT] Memory Models and Multi/Virtual-Cores -- WAS: 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing
- Next message: [CentOS] [OT] Memory Models and Multi/Virtual-Cores -- WAS: 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sat, 2005-06-25 at 12:49, Peter Arremann wrote: > > > > Some real-world benchmark numbers would make the case more > > convincing. Does anyone have some? I'm particularly interested > > in anything with AMD vs. IBM's 64-bit xeon boxes. > The talk we had wasn't really about 64bit... > > There are a few benchmarks out there comparing the two - but none I've seen > actually test 64bit linux tuned for Opteron/Xeon (instead of the stock RHEL > kernels, see below) with large memory (>4GB) running heavy IO. That's where > you'd see the biggest issue with intels implementation because of the lack of > IOMMU. Most of the situations where I would use them involve some disk update activity but much more reading, so what really interests me is how well a huge amount of memory works as a disk buffer to avoid doing heavy physical I/O. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
- Previous message: [CentOS] [OT] Memory Models and Multi/Virtual-Cores -- WAS: 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing
- Next message: [CentOS] [OT] Memory Models and Multi/Virtual-Cores -- WAS: 4.0 -> 4.1 update failing
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list