AMD Opteron -vs- Athlon 64

[Parkeshub]

Background: I'm a database developer working for a freight forwarder...shipping containers, etc...in sunny Australia.

Up until yesterday, one of my production servers, an old Compaq Proliant with dual Xeon 400 processors went up in flames..literally. Yes, it was old and slow but it used to run some overnight stuff so time wasn't really an issue...it just chugged along!

I need to replace it ASAP! I already use several AMD XP3200 PCs with DDR400 memory, SATA or ATA drives (Gigabyte 7N400 Pro2 mobo). They have proved to be very reliable and fast. I'm thinking of going that way again since I don't think "old clunky" will see electron flow again. But, then I thought "What about going 64 bit?" Trouble is, I don't have any 64 bit experience (except when I used to fix CDC Cyber 170 mainframes...but none of you would know what the heck one of those looked like, I guess!!!).

The OS is just vanilla Win 2K Server
The apps are based on VBA (XP edition) and/or VB6

Questions:

What's the difference between the Opteron and the Athlon 64?
Is it, at this stage, worthwhile to go 64bit given the above software OS/apps?
Any other comments?

 

[Zebo]

1. ECC/Registerd memory is required for Opteron
2. 64 bit is a future path. nothing more unless you use a 64bit OS and apps. Main thing to be concerned about is opterons intergrated mem controller and super effecient core design which makes it 1.55X as fast as any pentium clock for clock.
3. Can't speak about servers but A64/opteron architecture is all the rage in the enthusiast community. Faster, cooler, less power and furture 64 bitness.


Some database results under 64bit linux:

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2163

 

[imported_Phil]

I'll give you a more comprehensive reply when I'm at work but for now, I'll say that the Opterons will be more expensive, but you do at least have the option to use dual Opterons, or even quads.
Have a look at this thread, where I had the use of a quad Opteron 848 system for two weeks, there's also some benchmark results and sound samples in the thread.

 

[Zebo]

I found a very embarresing review for intel servers:Q http://www.2cpu.com/articles/99_9.html

Showing the opteron 246's walking all over the 3.2 xeon's for $500 less in 32 bit mode.

Some more

 

[Parkeshub]

Wow! I had heard that on the grapevine about AMD -vs- Intel. I'll read the article...thanks.

I guess the Windows OS for 64 bit will be XP? I imagine it would be available or pretty close.

 

[Zebo]

I don't know. But who cares...read the 32bit perfromance in my followup post above.. you'll be faster now and later

 

[Kenazo]

A64 uses S939 or s754, Opteron uses s940.
otherwise, they are basically the same processor. Like Zebo commented on in his first post, you do need Registered ECC ram to run Opterons, which might be a benefit in your case, though is normally a hinderance. It's a little harder ram to find, and a little slower than regular pc3200, but the ECC part would be preferable in your situation, I think. The A64's can't be used w/ ECC ram, iirc.

 

[thermalpaste]

I found a very embarresing review for intel servers http://www.2cpu.com/articles/99_9.html

Didn't you know Intel is a big W |-|ore?????

Intel processors are just for the stupid layman who doesn't know that there is a company called AMD who manufactures better CPU's.

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: thermalpaste

I found a very embarresing review for intel servers http://www.2cpu.com/articles/99_9.html

Didn't you know Intel is a big W |-|ore?????

Intel processors are just for the stupid layman who doesn't know that there is a company called AMD who manufactures better CPU's.

Just ignore this troll.

Anyway, the last time I checked... AMD dominated the performance sector of the Servers. Opterons beating out the Xeons in quite a lot of areas.

Zebo pretty much summed up everything I have to say. If an XP3200 isnt cutting it, the A64 is a big improvement but the Opteron should ensure you have that extra performance and a more stable platform. Servers like being stable

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: Elcs

Originally posted by: thermalpaste

I found a very embarresing review for intel servers http://www.2cpu.com/articles/99_9.html

Didn't you know Intel is a big W |-|ore?????

Intel processors are just for the stupid layman who doesn't know that there is a company called AMD who manufactures better CPU's.

Just ignore this troll.

Anyway, the last time I checked... AMD dominated the performance sector of the Servers. Opterons beating out the Xeons in quite a lot of areas.

Zebo pretty much summed up everything I have to say. If an XP3200 isnt cutting it, the A64 is a big improvement but the Opteron should ensure you have that extra performance and a more stable platform. Servers like being stable

Word.
The quad 848 server I was playing with (see above post), was absolutely rock solid. Not one crash in two weeks of solid running, and that's using Server 2003 64-bit Beta and Gentoo A64.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: thermalpaste

I found a very embarresing review for intel servers http://www.2cpu.com/articles/99_9.html

Didn't you know Intel is a big W |-|ore?????

Intel processors are just for the stupid layman who doesn't know that there is a company called AMD who manufactures better CPU's.

:roll:

 

[dguy6789]

The opteron uses the same architecture as the athlon 64, thus, both are very fast processors, but they use different socket.

If you want a good server setup, opteron is the only way to go.

 

[fuzzynavel]

zeon vs opteron

just put this link in another thread but it seems like it is necessary here too!

Opterons kick ass..

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: fuzzynavel
zeon vs opteron

just put this link in another thread but it seems like it is necessary here too!

Opterons kick ass..

look at the memory benchmark, that on die memory controller rocks!
Text

 

[Zebo]

Hey Ozzie, you pay for my and your new computers trip to the gold coast, I'll build it, and set it up and it will still be cheaper with the trip than you buying this stuff in OZ

You guys have crazy prices compared to newegg.com!!!

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: fuzzynavel
zeon vs opteron

just put this link in another thread but it seems like it is necessary here too!

Opterons kick ass..

look at the memory benchmark, that on die memory controller rocks!
Text

Yup !!! (see sig...)
If you can afford it, dual Opterons are the way to go. The registered memory is not that much more, and also, go SCSI, and try to get a motherboard with 64bit PCI-X slots like the Tyan thunder 2885, as the I/O performance blows away any SATA or even SATA raid setup!!!

And to answer the topic question, the Opteron has dual memory controllers like the 939, (754 is single channel), it also has (in the case of the 2xx series chips) three HTT channels, instead of one like the Athlon64, and requires registered memory. Also, they come in 1xx,2xx,8xx series, so you can use 1 or 2 or 8 (respecitively) processors in the motherboard.

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Yup !!! (see sig...)
If you can afford it, dual Opterons are the way to go. The registered memory is not that much more, and also, go SCSI, and try to get a motherboard with 64bit PCI-X slots like the Tyan thunder 2885, as the I/O performance blows away any SATA or even SATA raid setup!!!

And to answer the topic question, the Opteron has dual memory controllers like the 939, (754 is single channel), it also has (in the case of the 2xx series chips) three HTT channels, instead of one like the Athlon64, and requires registered memory. Also, they come in 1xx,2xx,8xx series, so you can use 1 or 2 or 8 (respecitively) processors in the motherboard.

Every time I see you sig it makes me insanely jealous

 

[effee]

there isnt much diff for SCSI and SATA

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: effee
there isnt much diff for SCSI and SATA

I beg to differ.. Maybe for a single drive, but we are talking about enterprise level raid caching controllers in 64bit PCI-X slots with 5-15 drive arrays. sharkeeper will back me up on this one....... At that level SATA is a joke compared to SCSI !

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: Dopefiend
Word.
The quad 848 server I was playing with (see above post), was absolutely rock solid. Not one crash in two weeks of solid running, and that's using Server 2003 64-bit Beta and Gentoo A64.

Smack me if Im stupid. Just had my flu jab this morning and had 8 hours straight of university work in what is called the hardest year but were you agreeing with me or disagreeing?

 

[Parkeshub]

I guess you are right....my boss might start asking questions, though!! Besides, the gold coast is 2 hours flying time from where I am...a bit less from where you are though, I guess!

 

[Parkeshub]

Let's see....
An Opteron model 244 (1.8G, dual CPU capable) runs about A$850...about US$590

A Gigabyte GA-K8NNXP-940 is about A$350...US$240

A Tynan Thunder S2880GNR is around A$1,100...about US$770

A gigabyte of ECC/Registered memory is around the A$500 mark

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Dopefiend

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Yup !!! (see sig...)
If you can afford it, dual Opterons are the way to go. The registered memory is not that much more, and also, go SCSI, and try to get a motherboard with 64bit PCI-X slots like the Tyan thunder 2885, as the I/O performance blows away any SATA or even SATA raid setup!!!

And to answer the topic question, the Opteron has dual memory controllers like the 939, (754 is single channel), it also has (in the case of the 2xx series chips) three HTT channels, instead of one like the Athlon64, and requires registered memory. Also, they come in 1xx,2xx,8xx series, so you can use 1 or 2 or 8 (respecitively) processors in the motherboard.

Every time I see you sig it makes me insanely jealous

Me tooo.....i see 248 Opertons and every time i just wet my pants But my AXP is fine for what i do-->or so i keep telling myself

 

[Parkeshub]

Out of interest, here's what we've ordered.....

Tyan Thunder K8S 2882 mobo
AMD Opteron 1.8Ghz 244 CPU
1Gb PC3200 ECC/Registered DDR
2 x 120Gb SATA
Adaptec SCSI controller for the tape backup
A fancy tower case to put it all in!!!

Originally, I specced a Gigabyte GA-K8NNXP-940 mobo but the supplier couldn't get one. I think the Tyan is a better option anyway...dual CPU for a start.

 

[Markfw]

Did you get 4x512 meg for the memory, so it will run in dual channel ? and was that 2x244 ? Looks good for CPU power. If you ever need real disk speed, get a real SCSI controller, like the LSI megaraid 320-2 and 4 15k SCSO 320 drives, then you will really know the definition of speed.