Physical CPU? or multicore?
From: Karl Arao <karlarao_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:21:36 +0800
Message-ID: <12ee65600904270421s1f9c9286he5ae43a258f7e18b_at_mail.gmail.com>
With the release of Intel (Nehalem) 5500 series, which is 45nm and I believe also supports multicore and hyperthreading. There are some things going on my mind..So from a single socket (Nehalem), quad core and HT enabled. You could see 8 processors when you do cat /proc/cpuinfo
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:21:36 +0800
Message-ID: <12ee65600904270421s1f9c9286he5ae43a258f7e18b_at_mail.gmail.com>
With the release of Intel (Nehalem) 5500 series, which is 45nm and I believe also supports multicore and hyperthreading. There are some things going on my mind..So from a single socket (Nehalem), quad core and HT enabled. You could see 8 processors when you do cat /proc/cpuinfo
But, from the performance perspective. Which is better?
Having 8 physical CPUs? Or Having 1 Physical CPU with quad core and HT enabled?
(Well, we know the license implications of 8 physical CPUs).. :)
But for the performance engineers and capacity planners. I'd like to hear your opinion.
- Karl Arao
karlarao.wordpress.com
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Mon Apr 27 2009 - 06:21:36 CDT