Re: L2 cache vs. faster processor

From: Paul Drake <discgolfdba_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 22:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20040715050959.52823.qmail@web20428.mail.yahoo.com>

Paul Drake <discgolfdba_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Terry Sutton <terrysutton_at_usa.net> wrote:
> > A client is ordering hardware for an Oracle on
> Linux
> > system, and has to choose between 2.8 GHz Xeon
> > processors with 1MB L2 cache and 3.06 GHz Xeon
> > processors (no L2 cache). Does anyone have any
> > recommendations on the value of L2 cache vs. a
> > faster processor?
> > --Terry
>
> Intel has some docs related to this up on their
> website.

marketing pop-ups here:

http://intel.com/business/bss/products/server/xeon/index.htm?iid=ipp_srvr_proc_xeon+xeon_srvr&

they state that the 4 MB 3.2 GHz Xeon MPs are 3 times as fast as the 700 MHz 1 MB cache model.

I have one more day to benchmark on a dual Opteron system before the eval system goes back. HP offers no 64 bit support for their integrated RAID controllers. "Oh, if you want to run 64 bit, buy an Itanium system".
Still run by them marketing types.

makes me wanna buy a Sun Opteron-based server.

post your code, and I'll run it tomorrow.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Thu Jul 15 2004 - 00:06:33 CDT