On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 20:14 +0100, stephen parkinson wrote: > Jacob S. wrote: > > >On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:37:39 -0400 > >Greg Folkert <greg@gregfolkert.net> wrote: > >>On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 05:40 -0700, William Ballard wrote: > >>>I'm totally pavlovian, saw a review of Dual Xeon vs. Dual Opteron on > >>> > >>>Infoworld and now I want to buy another computer. Probably won't. > >>> > >>>I currently have P43.2 1GB, and it's overclocked. But video > >>>encoding still takes hours and mozilla compile still takes a while. > >>> > >>>I'd like something with 2-4 CPUs and 2-4 GB of RAM, won't put a > >>>fancy graphics card in it or play games. Might render some 3D. I > >>>don't really want a whole workstation or expect to use it > >>>interactively. > >>> > >>>Xeons are just massively overpriced. Athlon 64 seems like the way > >>>to go. I see newegg has 1GBx1 PC3200 at $200 -- do you think I'd > >>>ever get 4 sticks of that in a single motherboard? In theory I > >>>could get two not top-of-the-line Athlon 64s and 4GB of PC3200 and a > >>>case and a hard drive for a bit over $2000, would this suit me? > >>> > >>>Would it be worth it? > >>> > >>> > >>Yes. For a computing machine. > >> > >>The Dual and Quad Opteron system usually have either 8 or 16 Memory > >>slots. > >> > >>Recently, I setup a Quad Opteron fastest available speed. Infiniband, > >>Dual 1000Mbit Ethernet, 10GB of Memory, 3Ware Sata local storage... > > > >Where did you find a motherboard that could handle 4 processors? They > >seem to be extremely rare these days, in my experience. > > > > > linux journal - tyan advert Actually, Contract job for me, their HP supplier got one for them in 2 weeks. So it is an HP machine. But, yes the LJ ads really do seem to be really good. I would have been able to get the same machine (basically) in ~4 weeks... but they needed it sooner. -- greg, greg@gregfolkert.net The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part