AMD Opteron 248 vs. Intel Xeon 2.8: 2-way Web Servers go Head to Head
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Jason Clark on December 17, 2003 9:15 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
The Database Server Bottleneck
There is almost always a bottleneck in hardware tests — ours was the database. The majority of web applications require a database server for data retrieval and storage. We used Microsoft SQL Server 2000 as our back-end database server for these tests. Prior web server tests that we’ve performed have been on single or dual CPU servers and have reflected accurately the performance of the hardware on which the tests were run. When we started running the tests on the servers, specifically the Opteron, we found that the tests had hit a wall and were not reflecting accurately the performance of the hardware. The issue was I/O, the largest bottleneck in any database server. We were putting so much load on the servers to get the CPU working hard that the database server I/O was maxed out. This, of course, caused the web tests to hit a performance plateau as each request run against the web application server has to wait for the database to complete its data transaction.So how do you get rid of an I/O bottleneck? Well, if you have the resources, you throw more disks at the problem. The problem with that solution is it gets expensive to have massive RAID arrays that are just used for testing purposes and have to be continually upgraded as hardware improves. To get around this expensive issue, we used the fastest and most inexpensive storage medium you can — memory. We created a RAMDISK and put the database on that new drive. RAMDISK has been around for years and has matured over the years to solutions that can be formatted as NTFS drives, which are easier to manage. Effectively, a RAMDISK partitions a portion of physical memory and allows it to be formatted as a drive letter that is available to the operating system.
Once we solved our bottleneck, the testing began and as you read on, you’ll see how the different platforms performed while under real-world web application load.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
Superbike - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
CRAMITPAL right as always!Jeff7181 - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
You'd think some people here have a huge investment in AMD the way they touch their balls every time AMD comes out ahead in a benchmark.Anyway, it's nice to see some benchmarks that clearly show what AMD processors are capable of... only other thing I'd like to see is the cost of the configurations used. That would even extend AMD's "lead."
morcegovermelho - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
Ooops...The last sentence should be read as:
try in calculator 141 + 82.3%. The result is 257,043.
morcegovermelho - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
quote:"The Opteron 248 setup managed to outperform Intel’s fastest, largest cache Xeon MP by a whopping 45%"
I think the number should be 82,3%.
If the Opteron was twice as fast (100% faster) as the Xeon the Average Request Time would be half of 257ms (128.5ms). The Opteron Average Request Time is 141ms (82% faster than Xeon).
Try in calculator: 141 + 82%. The result is 257,043.
Shinei - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
The message is clear: Opteron wins, flawless victory. Now if only I could AFFORD a 248 setup... ;)RZaakir - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
"it would of been nice to have taken out a singnal(sic) opteron also so(sic) see 1x proformance."Knowing how well Opteron chips scale, this was probably a decision made out of mercy for Intel.
Nehemoth - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
Awesomedvinnen - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
it would of been nice to have taken out a singnal opteron also so see 1x proformance.jerkweed - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
Quote: Intel was not very receptive to the idea of doing a head-to-head; not out of a fear of losing, but out of a desire not to lend AMD any credibility by showing that the Opteron is indeed a competitor to the Itanium 2.That might be what Intel told AT, but honestly, Intel is terrified of seeing a head-to-head benchmark for an application like this. Itanium/Itanium 2 (known by most HPC/64-bit gearheads as 'Itanic') will show numbers much slower than even their Xeons for a web benchmark. The vast majority of all web-server cpu usage is INT specific... look at the numbers for spec INT yourself:
http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q4/
Falco. - Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - link
all i can say is damn...can't wait for that 4 way shootout and the opteron vs itanium test ...