AMD Shanghai Launch - Database Testing
by Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on November 13, 2008 2:00 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Scalable CPU Performance
Unlike the AS3AP benchmark where AMD was able to match the performance of Harpertown at load point four and dominate at load point five, Intel is able to dominate this benchmark. Harpertown is able to lead by an average of 17% over Shanghai. Again, the performance of Shanghai @ 2.7 GHz is comparable to Barcelona @ 2.3 GHz at the lower load points but is able to lead Barcelona by as much as 25% at load point five.
We see similar CPU utilization profiles from the systems and the Opterons ramp quicker than Harpertown.
Opterons are again the clear winners on this one, but the Harpertown system is a little more competitive on this benchmark. Shanghai is still able to use around 17% and 27% less power compared to the Xeon configurations.
Even with Intel's better performance, Shanghai is still able to lead at three of the five load points in this test. The Xeon with eight DIMMs is not even close, but the Xeon four DIMM configuration is competitive for the first three load points.
Note: The line for Harpertown four DIMMs is dotted in the above graphs because we did not actually run this configuration but speculate this is the power consumption based on idle power consumption analysis.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
30 Comments
View All Comments
piesquared - Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - link
I mean really, how many times AT? You didn't seem to have a problem with i7 results, what's the hold up? Or is this going to be another dfi790, 790fx, 790gx, 780g etc, etc, etc, type of review. You know, the kind where you pay lip service to it, and then go back to cuddling up with Intel.... FraudsLTG - Friday, November 14, 2008 - link
Another power variable I didn't see in the review - The harpertown that matches AMD's price listed is the lower TDP model.The E5450 is 80w TDP
The X5450 is 120w TDP
LTG - Friday, November 14, 2008 - link
Sorry just found it on the benchmark graphs - looks to be the "E" version.LTG - Friday, November 14, 2008 - link
It would be very helpful to know this because almost all new Intel systems support the lower voltage FB-DIMMs.segerstein - Friday, November 14, 2008 - link
Yes, the future will be Muslim. AMD is going to get bought by rich UAEs. The next architecture will be called Istanbul.Why not Byzantium or Constantinople?
Tormeh - Saturday, November 15, 2008 - link
Maybe because Istanbul is an actual place, and not just a historic name?alpha754293 - Thursday, November 13, 2008 - link
You mentioned in this brief review that the FB-DIMMS remove any power efficiency advantage that the Intels othewise might have had.Does the AMD systems also use the FB-DIMMS?
Also, how are you measuring the power consumption because a lot of the charts/graphs look nearly exactly identical, which would seem odd unless it was using the CPU (i.e. all of the application profiles) were EXACTLY identical.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 13, 2008 - link
AMD does *not* use FB-DIMMs, and very likely never will. The power penalty appears to be something like 7W per FB-DIMM, possibly even a bit more, and the performance advantage... well, it doesn't exist. FB-DIMM was an idea to add more memory on a single channel at the cost of increasing latency. I just don't think it really made enough of a difference to affect the vast majority of server users.Johnniewalker - Thursday, November 13, 2008 - link
Now that would be cool!acejj26 - Thursday, November 13, 2008 - link
Memory frequency is now 800 MHz. Bandwidth is a function of the frequency, but they are not the same.