X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 893DD9FB3AD for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:36:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 49755-02 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:36:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mail.envysolutions.com (mark.mielke.cc [206.248.142.186]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FB49FB2BE for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:36:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.envysolutions.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999005403E; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:36:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.envysolutions.com Received: from mail.envysolutions.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mark.mielke.cc [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2pWdjwYkb65t; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:36:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.envysolutions.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5BFE15403F; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:36:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:36:17 -0400 From: mark@mark.mielke.cc To: Arjen van der Meijden Cc: Vivek Khera , "Pgsql-Performance ((((E-mail))))" Subject: Re: Opteron vs. Xeon "benchmark" Message-ID: <20060922223617.GA22923@mark.mielke.cc> References: <4513A59E.3000807@valuecare.nl> <45145AB7.70004@tweakers.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45145AB7.70004@tweakers.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.094 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO, NO_REAL_NAME, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200609/311 X-Sequence-Number: 20997 On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 11:50:47PM +0200, Arjen van der Meijden wrote: > If you're an AMD-fan, by all means, buy their products, those processors > are indeed fast and you can build decent servers with them. But don't > rule out Intel, just because with previous processors they were the > slower player ;) Yep. From what I understand, Intel is 8 to 10 times the size of AMD. It's somewhat amazing that AMD even competes, and excellent for us, the consumer, that they compete well, ensuring that we get very fast computers, for amazingly low prices. But Intel isn't crashing down any time soon. Perhaps they became a little lazy, and made a few mistakes. AMD is forcing them to clean up. May the competition continue... :-) Cheers, mark -- mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com __________________________ . . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder |\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ | | | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them... http://mark.mielke.cc/