Intel QUAD core vs Intel DUAL core... which is best suited?

Previous topic

Developer

Next topic

Author	Message
Björn Dieding@xrow.de	Tuesday 14 November 2006 11:03:50 am Hi, I like to gather some opinitions. We have a website with rather lower traffic but an imense complex pagelayout. When we clear all caches the server needs like 5 min to recover on 9 siteacccess with one cache dir. I was wondering if one could give an estimate on rather we should use a dual core with 3GHz clocking or a QUAD core with 1,6 GHz clocking as our next hardware. My estimate would be that a dual core would improve our situation more as a quad, since apache might be faster processing a single thread when having a clocking of 3GHz. What do you think? Looking for a new job? http://www.xrow.com/xrow-GmbH/Jobs Looking for hosting? http://hostingezpublish.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- GMT +01:00 Hannover, Germany Web: http://www.xrow.com/
André R.	Tuesday 14 November 2006 12:48:22 pm Since it's not multithreaded, the dualcore should be a lot faster. Probably cheaper to? Also consider the AMD Opteron platform, they don't have plans to change their new socket any time soon, so a socket f / 1207 should last way into the quadro era and possible further. Also while Intel has cached up a big bit the last half year moving away from the Netburst (pentium4) architecture, AMD is mostly still the king of price / performance / watt. eZ Online Editor 5: http://projects.ez.no/ezoe \|\| eZJSCore (Ajax): http://projects.ez.no/ezjscore \|\| eZ Publish EE http://ez.no/eZPublish/eZ-Publish-Enterprise-Subscription @: http://twitter.com/andrerom
Björn Dieding@xrow.de	Tuesday 21 November 2006 6:53:35 am ty thats what I thought too Looking for a new job? http://www.xrow.com/xrow-GmbH/Jobs Looking for hosting? http://hostingezpublish.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- GMT +01:00 Hannover, Germany Web: http://www.xrow.com/

Author

Message

Björn Dieding@xrow.de

Tuesday 14 November 2006 11:03:50 am

Hi,
I like to gather some opinitions.

We have a website with rather lower traffic but an imense complex pagelayout. When we clear all caches the server needs like 5 min to recover on 9 siteacccess with one cache dir.

I was wondering if one could give an estimate on rather we should use a dual core with 3GHz clocking or a QUAD core with 1,6 GHz clocking as our next hardware.

My estimate would be that a dual core would improve our situation more as a quad, since apache might be faster processing a single thread when having a clocking of 3GHz.

What do you think?

Looking for a new job? http://www.xrow.com/xrow-GmbH/Jobs
Looking for hosting? http://hostingezpublish.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GMT +01:00 Hannover, Germany
Web: http://www.xrow.com/

André R.

Tuesday 14 November 2006 12:48:22 pm

Since it's not multithreaded, the dualcore should be a lot faster. Probably cheaper to?

Also consider the AMD Opteron platform, they don't have plans to change their new socket any time soon, so a socket f / 1207 should last way into the quadro era and possible further. Also while Intel has cached up a big bit the last half year moving away from the Netburst (pentium4) architecture, AMD is mostly still the king of price / performance / watt.

eZ Online Editor 5: http://projects.ez.no/ezoe || eZJSCore (Ajax): http://projects.ez.no/ezjscore || eZ Publish EE http://ez.no/eZPublish/eZ-Publish-Enterprise-Subscription
@: http://twitter.com/andrerom

Björn Dieding@xrow.de

Tuesday 21 November 2006 6:53:35 am

ty thats what I thought too

eZ debug

Timing:	Jan 21 2025 20:33:26
Script start
Timing:	Jan 21 2025 20:33:26
Module start 'layout'
Timing:	Jan 21 2025 20:33:26
Module start 'content'
Timing:	Jan 21 2025 20:33:26
Module end 'content'
Timing:	Jan 21 2025 20:33:26
Script end

Main resources:

Total runtime	0.0185 sec
Peak memory usage	2,048.0000 KB
Database Queries	3

Timing points:

Checkpoint	Start (sec)	Duration (sec)	Memory at start (KB)	Memory used (KB)
Script start	0.0000	0.0060	589.2734	151.2422
Module start 'layout'	0.0060	0.0023	740.5156	36.7109
Module start 'content'	0.0083	0.0086	777.2266	94.2188
Module end 'content'	0.0169	0.0016	871.4453	33.9922
Script end	0.0185		905.4375

Time accumulators:

Accumulator	Duration (sec)	Duration (%)	Count	Average (sec)
Ini load
Load cache	0.0028	15.2563	14	0.0002
Check MTime	0.0012	6.6062	14	0.0001
Mysql Total
Database connection	0.0008	4.3373	1	0.0008
Mysqli_queries	0.0021	11.3165	3	0.0007
Looping result	0.0000	0.0592	1	0.0000
Template Total	0.0012	6.3	1	0.0012
Template load	0.0009	4.9688	1	0.0009
Template processing	0.0003	1.3544	1	0.0003
Override
Cache load	0.0007	3.6092	1	0.0007
General
dbfile	0.0032	17.0095	8	0.0004
String conversion	0.0000	0.0309	4	0.0000
Note: percentages do not add up to 100% because some accumulators overlap

Templates used to render the page:

Usage	Requested template	Template	Template loaded	Edit	Override
1	print_pagelayout.tpl	<No override>	extension/community/design/community/templates/print_pagelayout.tpl
Number of times templates used: 1 Number of unique templates used: 1

Time used to render debug report: 0.0001 secs