Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: smooth2o who wrote (257502)	12/22/2008 9:50:26 AM
From: fastpathguru	Respond to of 275872

>re: So I'm not saying Nehalem is not going to be a great product - but I don't think it is an across the board walk-away, and there are important workloads where (at least in current state) it is not superior to current shanghai products. In particular, at lower levels of processor utilization, Nehalem power management gets to a lower number, but for workloads with higher levels of average utilization (which is after all the goal of virtualization), AMD power envelope looks a little better. Uhh, you are way out of date. 2S Nehalem beats 4S Shanghai. Check Ihub/Intel for numbers... FAIL

To: smooth2o who wrote (257502)	12/22/2008 11:24:39 AM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

uhh - I have both shanghai and nehalem systems in my labs, the latest stuff from both vendors. We run our tests on the workloads we are concerned about... that trumps somebody else's test, at least for me. These are not empty benchmarks, they are simulations of the actual production systems. For the database loads we are testing, Nehalem wins for a small number of VMs but as that number goes up, performance falls off, and by 8 VMs, shanghai is winning on performance per watt and on response time. We work closely with engineers at both companies to identify pinch points and get work-arounds.