Dual Opteron Review

Here is a review of an Opteron 244 system based on a Via K8T800 chipset .

http://www.legionhardware.com/html/doc.php?id=256

I wish they'd put in a dual Xeon platform instead of a single P4. This was more of an apples vs oranges comparison.

A dual Xeon would likely lose most of the benches , at least from what I've seen when their performance is compared to a 2.8 - 3.2 ghz single P4. This review showed what the opteron system could do in the worst case situation , single processor benches versus Intel's best . The only thing that could be worse would be a test with the benchmark suite used by Tomsharsdware .

But I really hoped there would have been some more SMP benches and in that case a Xeon rig would be nice .

Wow a review of a dual cpu system using all single threaded applications? These people are genius.


also, why didnt they include the clock speed or PR rating of the opterons?

They did , they discussed the new fancy naming system at the beginning of the article and then also mentioned the clockspeed again in the conclusion ( or near the conclusion ) .

They still could have put in a dual Xeon for a more rounded review.

Then it would have been 32bit apples vs an apple vs a couple of 32/64bit oranges @32bit.

I see.
Pentium 3.0 GHz as $380 + P4C800 $180 = $560. And why not 3.2 GHz?

How can you beat that? Yeah, dual Opteron 244:
processors 2x$675 = $1,350 plus $450 motherboard.
That would be $1,800.

Yeah, cheap AMD prices! Hilarious.

Hey, wait a minute, that was 1 stick of Corsair 512 MB for Pentium against 2 gigabyte of 4x512 MB of registered memory for Opteron? Yeeehaaa! Ya know, pentium is so expensive we didn't have money to use dual channel memory.
Running to the store right now, I can really use that 10% off coupon in Office Depot.

Well maybe you should realise that the dual opteron setup isn't meant for us average people , but for servers and workstations hence the very heavy price . If you check the price on a Xeon configuration which you would like to even attempt to compete with this Opteron rig you would likely see higher prices for less performance and no 64bit ability .

That is why Audioaficionado referred to it as an apples to oranges benchmark review .

If you check the price on a Xeon configuration which you would like to even attempt to compete with this Opteron rig you would likely see higher priceas for less performance and no 64bit ability

Click to expand...

Really? Well, 3 GHz Xeon would be like $490, dual motherboard like $220. Sounds cheaper to me though I am sure not to try that either.

The performance of an Opteron 244 is likely to be quite a bit above that of a dual 3 ghz Xeon in several disciplines . Thus Intel has released 1mb L3 cache Xeons which ain't cheap and in fact hardly perform any better . Anyway the point is imply like this ;

Imagine someone comparing a dumptruck's features and then arguing that their 1 year old Honda CRV is better because it has better 0-60 times and is cheaper . But to put a different perspective on things imagine if that heavy duty dumptruck was shown to be almost as fast , just as nimble and to have a mpg rating on par with the CRV .............. that dumptruck would start to look alot better wouldn't it . That is how I see this review , the Opteron is tested outside of its strengths and does very well indeed , but when tested in it's area it simply owns the single P4 . The Opteron is therefore a turbo nos injected dumptruck .

Nope, it doesn't look good to me. The review is a death sentence for a desktop use as far as I am concerned, it shows nothing but a very expensive setup with 4 times as much registered memory unable to beat a SINGLE 3.0C GHz Pentium working ONLY ON A SINGLE CHANNEL memory. This is for a desktop use.
Pricewise it is more than 3 times more expensive than Pentium, only for the mobo+CPUs, not talking about memory.

It is a dumptruck, and I don't know what domain you are talking since in the server domain, what it should be?, didn't amount to 20,000 sold, excluding supercomputers not even 5,000 Opterons were sold so far. The only thing they "sell" is a hype to the AMD cheerleading squad that has no money to buy any better than XP 1700 and XP 2500 (those afluent among them). Comparing to 150,000 Xeons that get sold every quarter I call this a bogus bluff. IF THEY CANNOT CONVINCE INDUSTRY to buy 64-bit hype, just like Intel Itanium, I don't see myself driving dump truck either.

2 GB memory as opposed to 512 MB memory?
Pentium HT running on P4C800 uses dual channel in optimal settings. I don't see anybody in their right mind using single channel on a Canterwood board like that since the DIFFERENCE IN MEMORY BANDWIDTH IS 75-80%! Unlike with AMD processors.
Do yourself a favor, get Sysoft Sandra and check how an Intel Pentium memory bandwidth on a Canterwood board looks like.
THAT IS CALLED DISABLING THE SETUP FOR THE PURPOSE OF BIAS REVIEW AND EVEN THAT DIDN'T WORK! AMAZING.
That is the idea of balanced review? What are you smoking?

Sigh ................ I am in no way saying that this is a desktop chip . What it however shows me is a server/workstation chip which can double as a more than decent desktop ................. note I say double . That more Xeons sell than Opterons is not a disputed fact , but at the same time that doesn't make them better . In fact in the server space it is the Xeons which are being sold on hype and pr , not performance . Currently the opteron soloutions offer the fastest webservers overall but Intel has been able for years to outsell AMD even when AMD has better chips , through brand recognition , software support , contracts , threats and hype . So the sales figures of the Xeons are very very good for the Intel bottom line but until they get some faster and 64 bit soloutions ( besides Itanium ) they will be outclassed in everything but hype .

1/ My dumptruck analogy was just to show the totally different focus of the 2 classes of chip . A dual Xeon or Opteron rig is not for game playing ( at least not primarily ) and what they are made to do a P4 3.2 absoloutely sucks at .

2/ 64 bit has its advantages , but right now they are limited to professional apps , computation , servers , databases etc . Which is why it can be seen as quite a bit of PR for us in the gaming/desktop world . But in the professional world , don't be fooled 64 bit will creep in and AMD has a very big foot in the door .

3/ Intel's Itanium has a different problem to the Opteron , it is far more expensive and totally proprietary with its own special 64 it OS and it's own specialised apps . If you want to do something with it you have to write or rewrite your own program and in a special way just for the itanium . Whereas the Opteron is more flexible and can be used much more easily and cheaply , it is not the ultraniche product that the Itanium is , thus adoption of the Opteron shouldn't be as difficult or costly .

Someone definitally needs to do a comparison between a dual MP system, a dual Operton, and a dual Xeon. That would be interesting to see.
It looks like it has good potential to work as a desktop system as well, although a bit expensive for the average desktop/gaming machine.

Whatever - just continue to bury your head in the sand about the A64's/Opterons potential in the desktop sector especially for gamers. Oh and this review has DDR400 Ram for the Intel and only DDR333 Ram for the Opteron 144. Just imagine the potential with a 146 and DDR400.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/opteron-1.html

I'm soon to be in the market for a desktop/workstation dual platform.

I'd like to get a Xeon setup but only if it can be significantly upgraded for a few more years. I like the Asus 875P Canterwood chipset dual platform but unfortunatly they haven't made it very overclockable yet. Iwill can overclock better but the E7505 is older than the Canterwood and has less memory bandwith. Maybe I can get faster Xeon CPUs for a reasonable price in a year or two with the help of Opteron market pressure.

The AMD MP platform is not going anywhere much further as AMD's eggs are going into the 64bit basket. But it's not that much less powerful than the midrange Xeon CPUs are now.

So do I get a dual MP and wait for the mid level Optrons to come back from the upper stratoshere in a few years.

Or do I get the Xeons now and throw some upgrade $$$ and keep it a couple years longer than I would have the MP platform.

Decisions, decisions...

This review was not one that anyone should use to show any point other than it beat a single P4. A real review would match the dual Opteron against both a dual Xeon and a dual Itanium (Intel’s 64bit server chip – FYI 1X 1Ghz Itanium will run $7K a pop) and would be well matched in RAM Quality /Quantity and then redo the review again with the best of each maxed out all tested on 32bit and 64bit real world applications both single and multi thread. Until then there is not much to compare.

Those reviewers don't seem to comprehend what dual cpu's are used for really... And while I totally agree with whatever2003 about the canterwood being used without ram, you should also understand what the people here are trying to tell you.

Here's a good FYI for some good FAQs concerning the various platforms over at 2CPU.com

http://forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37130

Here are some links :

http://www.aceshardware.com/read_news.jsp?id=65000411
http://www.aceshardware.com/read_news.jsp?id=60000485
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1328 ( too many single processor benches , just like the review in this thread )
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=55000251 ( Xeons present )

Edit : http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=255