Processors

Does anybody have any experience or know of any articles between 4
dual-core vs. a 8 proc box'
I'm looking at comparing processors exclusively.
ThanksThe licensing price for 4 dual-core is 4 processors but for 8 proc., it's 8
processors. This should be a sufficient argument to chose the former over
the later.
--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
"Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157559259.768841.213380@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Does anybody have any experience or know of any articles between 4
> dual-core vs. a 8 proc box'
> I'm looking at comparing processors exclusively.
> Thanks
>|||Money for licensing is of no concern.
Sylvain Lafontaine (fill the blanks, no spam please) wrote:
> The licensing price for 4 dual-core is 4 processors but for 8 proc., it's 8
> processors. This should be a sufficient argument to chose the former over
> the later.
> --
> Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
> MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
> E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
>
> "Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1157559259.768841.213380@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Does anybody have any experience or know of any articles between 4
> > dual-core vs. a 8 proc box'
> >
> > I'm looking at comparing processors exclusively.
> >
> > Thanks
> >|||Then you're a lucky guy or you are doing a theorytical study.
Comparing a dual core processor with two single cores mean nothing if you
don't specify the type of processor, memory, motherboard (north and south
bridges are important here) and the type of controler used for input/output
. Of course, running 32 or 64 bits will also have some effect on the
results, as well as the type of software and operating system used.
So, comparing only the processors can be tricky.
However, if you want a short answer, single core processor are older
technologies, so they should probably give you a lesser performance in
comparaison against the latest dual-core processors running at the same
frequency on a core by core basis.
--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
"Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157564917.777675.299710@.p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Money for licensing is of no concern.
>
>
> Sylvain Lafontaine (fill the blanks, no spam please) wrote:
>> The licensing price for 4 dual-core is 4 processors but for 8 proc., it's
>> 8
>> processors. This should be a sufficient argument to chose the former
>> over
>> the later.
>> --
>> Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
>> MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
>> E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
>>
>> "Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1157559259.768841.213380@.h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Does anybody have any experience or know of any articles between 4
>> > dual-core vs. a 8 proc box'
>> >
>> > I'm looking at comparing processors exclusively.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>|||Maybe, to focus my concern slightly, how does SQL 2005 handles
parallelism with dual core vs. single core architectures. With
analytical processes crunching enormous datasets, hundreds of millions
of records, we have found parallelism essential.|||SQL Server doesn't differentiate between a dual core processor and two
single core processors - they're both seen as two processors. The actual
performance is going to depend on the processor architecture - whether the
dual core shares components between the processor for example.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157571394.948255.161810@.d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Maybe, to focus my concern slightly, how does SQL 2005 handles
> parallelism with dual core vs. single core architectures. With
> analytical processes crunching enormous datasets, hundreds of millions
> of records, we have found parallelism essential.
>|||Multi-cores is not hyperthreading: excerpt for the licensing purpose, there
is no real difference in performance or in functionality between a dual-core
or two single cores.
However, a dual-core will not access the memory in the same way as two
single cores because of the type of memory controler used and the L2 cache
and even then, there are differences between old dual cores and the new
models, the latest beeing able to share their L2 cache between the two
cores.
For a peformance comparaison between the latest serie of Xeon (the Woodcrest
or the 51xx) and the Opteron, see:
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2772 .
In my opinion, you don't have to compare the Woodcrest serie with any of the
previous models of Xeon, either single or dual-core.
--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
"Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157571394.948255.161810@.d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Maybe, to focus my concern slightly, how does SQL 2005 handles
> parallelism with dual core vs. single core architectures. With
> analytical processes crunching enormous datasets, hundreds of millions
> of records, we have found parallelism essential.
>|||Thank you!!|||"Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157564917.777675.299710@.p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Money for licensing is of no concern.
I call "shenanigans" on that statement.
I'll assume you're on the Enterprise version. Last I checked
(more than a year ago) Ent was going for $16,000 a processor.
I don't care what kind of budget you have 4 x 16K = $64,000
is relevant. It's a concern to even a multi-million dollar budget.
If it's truly "of no concern", it's because you're planning on
running it illegally.|||Maybe he works for the Treasury Dept and they just print as much money as
they need.
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Use of included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
"Sgt.Sausage" <nobody@.nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:938ee$4501f2a6$42a1e606$22924@.FUSE.NET...
> "Ulan" <wdoman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1157564917.777675.299710@.p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>> Money for licensing is of no concern.
> I call "shenanigans" on that statement.
> I'll assume you're on the Enterprise version. Last I checked
> (more than a year ago) Ent was going for $16,000 a processor.
> I don't care what kind of budget you have 4 x 16K = $64,000
> is relevant. It's a concern to even a multi-million dollar budget.
> If it's truly "of no concern", it's because you're planning on
> running it illegally.
>