Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC1C632B88 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 01:40:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64390-07 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 04:40:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49494632963 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 01:40:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (static-71-179-240-8.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [71.179.240.8]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0M3u5q-1P7Btk1lCc-00rSkS; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 06:40:07 +0200 Message-ID: <4C7B3624.1010907@2ndquadrant.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:40:04 -0400 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa CC: Scott Carey , Philippe Rimbault , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Performance on new 64bit server compared to my 32bit desktop References: <4C6CE64D.6070104@edd.fr> <4C6D76FE.9010407@2ndquadrant.com> <4C77F4F4.4020900@2ndquadrant.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:GP2q5tgS1q4vyUtTenrdgsmQnBOfelcVqJv5AjVQodI Qt24Q1KwSTWmudieRPARcku8V1efJj+m/LM/rcf4i6tTKKH4LF iyu0m04wCW9/6piybRE//exAP3SJptt6Ux9fjZHV5oBs4rkNfC X2Od1GUkrPNQs+fvy/cEXzLFpC/ljxz7Hukrq2hEo4xzBr3IiZ NpkTeve9DxRR9oKL2RVZAY4LFqRX4/EWkO8Tz2OEWQ= X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201008/306 X-Sequence-Number: 40149 Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote: > Also, nowadays, Intel has better performance than AMD, at least when > comparing Athlon 64 vs Core2, I'm still saving to get a Phenom II > system in order to benchmark them and see how it goes (does anyone > have one of these for testing?). > Things even out again when you reach the large server line from AMD that uses DDR-3 RAM; they've finally solved this problem there. Scott Marlowe has been helping me out with some tests of a new system he's got running the AMD Opteron 6172, using the STREAM memory benchmark. Intro to that and some sample numbers at http://www.advancedclustering.com/company-blog/stream-benchmarking.html He's been seeing >75GB/s of aggregate memory bandwidth out of that monster--using gcc, so even at a disadvantage compared to the Intel one used for that report. If you're only using one or two cores Intel still seems to have a lead, I am still working out if that's true in every situation. I haven't had a chance to test any of the Phenom II processors yet, from what I know of their design I expect them to still have the same fundamental design issues that kept all AMD processors from scaling very well, memory speed wise, the last few years. You might be able to dig a system using one of them out of the list at http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/peecee/Bandwidth.html , I didn't notice anything obvious that featured one. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.us