Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

IDC says PC market is rebounding

IDC says PC market is rebounding

Research firm IDC has published its latest report into the state of the PC market and while there are some signs…

More...
TSMC steps up development of 10nm process

TSMC steps up development of 10nm process

TSMC, the world’s biggest chip foundry for hire, has reportedly stepped up development of its 10nm manufacturing process.

More...
Broadwell 14nm desktop comes late in Q2 2015

Broadwell 14nm desktop comes late in Q2 2015

A while ago we mentioned that Broadwell won’t show up in the desktop space this year and we got it right.…

More...
AMD A8-7600 Kaveri APU reviewed

AMD A8-7600 Kaveri APU reviewed

Today we'll take a closer look at AMD's A8-7600 APU Kaveri APU, more specifically we'll examine the GPU performance you can…

More...
EVGA GTX 780 Classified reviewed

EVGA GTX 780 Classified reviewed

The EVGA GTX 780 Classified has been dethroned as the company’s fastest non-Titan card following the introduction of the GTX 780…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 22 November 2011 12:26

Bulldozer server benchmarks fail to impress

Written by

amd logon

Intel has little to fear but itself

 A few weeks ago AMD introduced its latest FX-series desktop processors, based on the new Bulldozer architecture. The new series offered underwhelming performance and failed to impress AMD enthusiasts, although they tend to offer pretty good value for money.

Now it is time for Bulldozer server parts and sadly it turns out they are not much better than their desktop siblings. Punters had expected the server parts to be a tad more competitive, thanks to their emphasis on hyperthreading. However, this does not seem to be the case.

Ars Technica compiled test results from several sources and went out of their way to compare the cost of new Opteron-based server systems and Intel Xeon systems. Although Opterons did manage to offer superior performance against comparable Xeons in a TPC-C scenario, they end up costing about 50 percent more, yet deliver an 18 percent improvement in performance.

In SPEC JBB2005 Java emulation Opterons also fared well against Xeon parts, but they appear to offer little to no improvement over previous generation Opterons. In virtualization and HPC tests conducted by Anandtech, the Opteron 6276 failed to beat Intel’s Xeon X5670 and pretty much continued the underwhelming streak.

The biggest issue is the lack of a clear performance advantage over existing Opteron 6100 parts, so the new architecture doesn’t appear to offer much incentive to upgrade from the previous generation. Worse, the new Opterons struggle to compete with Intel Westmere EP parts, despite the fact that they have been on sale for a year and a half.


More here.

 

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments