Final Words

In a few weeks, there will be new dual CPU offerings from both AMD and Intel. We will need to start over again, so any conclusion we make today has a very short lifespan. For those of you who did not find the right benchmark among the ones we presented here, we will add more benchmarks then. Power consumption is also on our to do list. Our first power tests show there is little difference between the power consumption of the same server whether it contains 32 nm six-core X5670 or 45 nm quad-core X5570 CPUs.

So what can we conclude so far? Add two cores and a few tweaks to a server CPU architecture which already has the fastest cores on the market and you’ll get very impressive results. Right now, the six-core Xeon wins every comparison with a similar dual CPU configuration. The interesting thing to note is that the margin varies heavily with the type of application.

ERP applications and OLTP databases benefit a lot from the increased L3-cache, hyperthreading and the extra cores. The result is that those applications show absolutely stunning results for Intel: the dual CPU platform is just as fast as AMD best quad CPU configurations. With twice the amount of performance per core there is simply no other option than Intel.

The a similar picture appears for the well scaling native applications such as OLAP or DSS databases. The Xeon 5670 did not slaughter the competition there, but it was still significantly ahead. Be aware though that many native applications will only scale well in certain scenarios. Database size, usage patterns, disk performance and other factors must all be considered. It is not because your application runs on Oracle or SQL Server that it will automatically make good use of the extra cores and threads.  A single six-core Xeon will be fast enough in a lot of cases and a second CPU might only add 30% or so.

The only server of which the performance almost always scales well with extra cores is a virtualized one, providing there are no other hardware bottlenecks of course. If you are shopping around for a server which has to house lots and lots of light VMs (VDI comes to mind), the VMmark results point only in one direction: the new six-core Xeon. At the other end of the performance spectrum is our own “heavy duty” virtualization benchmarking. Running 8 very heavy VMs requiring 24 virtual CPUs runs still best on the Intel Xeon on ESX. When it comes to Hyper-V, the difference is a lot smaller. So for those of you who want to consolidate on Hyper-V, we would advise you to wait a few more weeks. Octal cores from Intel and AMD and twelve-cores from AMD will make the next server CPU comparison much more tense. 

vApus Mark I: Performance-Critical applications virtualized
Comments Locked

40 Comments

View All Comments

  • DigitalFreak - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    Are you seriously going to buy a dual socket server (or workstation at a minimum) to play games? I'd rather see them take the time to do more enterprise benchmarking than waste it on what 0.00001% of the market wants.
  • Starglider - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 - link

    No but some HPC / CAD / scientific computing benchmarks would be good. Presumably we'll get the full suite when Nehalem EX and Magny Cours turn up.
  • vitchilo - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    I want to encode video, I mean a s***load of video + play games from time to time.
  • rajod1 - Monday, February 1, 2016 - link

    You see you are writing server cpu reviews to punk kids that somehow only think of playing a game on a server. They just do not get it. Babies with computers, maybe this could play mario. These are good for boring server work, database, HyperV, etc. ECC ram. And they are still the best bang for the buck in a used server in 2016.
  • Starglider - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    > You can now use up to two DIMMs at 1333MHz,
    > while the Xeon 5500 would throttle back to
    > 1066MHz if you did this.

    Presumably you mean 'up to two DIMMs per channel'?
  • DigitalFreak - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    Not sure about the 2 DIMMs per channel forcing 1066Mhz. We've been ordering Dell R710s with the X5570 and 12x4GB of memory, which runs at 1333Mhz.
  • TurboMax3 - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 - link

    You are right. I work for Dell, since a couple of months after the launch of the 5500 Xeons we could do 2 DIMM per Channel (DPC) at 1333 MHz. It is a property of the chipset, rather than the CPU.

    Also, going to 3 DPC will clock the memory down to 800 MHz, and this has been available in R710 (and similar products from others) for some time now.

    The 8GB DIMM is getting cheap enough to be quoted without shame. 16 GB DIMMS still cost as much as my car.
  • Navier - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    Do you have information on Nehalem-EX and how that is going to fit in the updated road map with the latest 6 core systems?
  • DigitalFreak - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link

    The Nehalem-EX (probably called the Xeon 7500 series) are for quad socket boxes. From what I've been hearing, they should be released on 3/30. Not sure when the Poweredge R910 and Proliant DL580 G7 will show up though.
  • duploxxx - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 - link

    it is launched on 30/3 but actually only available mid june, call it a paper launch or whatever you want.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now