Re: Physical CPU? or multicore?

In my opinion, It will depend on the hardware architecture also. For instance, HP enterprise systems consist of cells(usually). Each cell contain some size of memory and a number of CPUs. Thus, if an operation uses CPU which requires more than a number of CPU which a cell contains, it will use the CPU on the other cell board. This means performance degradation due to the interconnection overhead between cell boards.

Thus, a system having 8 CPUs which is multi-threaded may be better than 4+4 CPU in two cells or boards.

Derya.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Karl Arao <karlarao_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> 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-l