Re: Related question: Athlon 64 vs. Opteron
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 03:24:18PM -0700, mike wrote:
> Anyone have any good data on this (again, in regards to running kernel
> 2.6.x on Debian-amd64)
>
> The Athlon64 x2 pricing is decent for dual-core... there has to be
> some big difference, other than you can't build multiprocessor
> Athlon64 systems (I don't believe) - otherwise, they'd be cutting off
> the reason to spend all that money on Opteron dual-cores.
What more reason does there have to be? Why does a xeon cost way more
than a p4? Because it can.
> Does anyone have any Linux benchmarks or anything else related to this
> comparison? Any feedback is appreciated.
As far as I know a single core opteron at 2.4ghz matches the performance
of an FX55 pretty much perfectly. Same clock speed and cache and all.
most athlon 64's have less cache than the opterons, but not all of them.
Early FX's were the same socket as the opteron after all, they just had
a higher clock speed than you could buy an opteron with.
Also opterons work with registered memory which some people prefer since
it allows more memory sockets in a system and is hence useful for
servers. The athlon64 of course can't use that, so it is limited to 2
or 3 memory slots per channel.
Len Sorensen
Reply to: