Comments on: Intel hustles for dual-core Xeon debut

"Paxville" is intended to recapture some turf lost to competitor AMD, but it's likely to be quickly outmoded.

[Roman12]

Can't think of a reason for such price on Intel chips.

AMD CPU's are just as good Intel's, and cost much less. AMD is a really good rival to Intel, and perhaps one day will be bigger then Intel.

__________________________________
R.K.
http://www.Remove-All-Spyware.com/

[Roman12]

Can't think of a reason for such price on Intel chips.

AMD CPU's are just as good Intel's, and cost much less. AMD is a really good rival to Intel, and perhaps one day will be bigger then Intel.

__________________________________
R.K.
http://www.Remove-All-Spyware.com/

[JTowner]

HP + AMD is $2k cheaper - And faster

HP DL385 vers PE 2850 - dual proc, dual core, 5x disks, 4gb RAM, everything identical, HP is $2k cheaper than Dell. (10,800 vers 12,900)

Intel - you'd better come up with something better soon, AMD is running away with your cash cow & customers.

[JTowner]

HP + AMD is $2k cheaper - And faster

HP DL385 vers PE 2850 - dual proc, dual core, 5x disks, 4gb RAM, everything identical, HP is $2k cheaper than Dell. (10,800 vers 12,900)

Intel - you'd better come up with something better soon, AMD is running away with your cash cow & customers.

Er.. Really?

Just checked dell.com
The config you reported for a PE2850 - 5XDisks, 4GB RAM, Dual Proc, Dual Core - is $8,086.00; i.e 2 thousand CHEAPER than HP
Go to
http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/pedge_2850?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz

[MattLPMP]

Prices are on parity

Eh, I don't think there's a big argument to be made on price; for one, you're not talking apples to apples -- it's virtually impossible to "align" an Opteron server with a Xeon server without turning to performance specs and considering the server's role.

For kicks, I just config'ed and quoted a DL385 (2x2x2.4GHz) from HP against a PE2850 (2x2x3.0GHz), each with 4GB of RAM, 5x72GB 10k SCSI, and 3-year, 4-hour 24x7 support. The systems are within $100 shipped, which means you're basically at the whimsy of your reps to determine which is a better deal.

Performance-wise, however, it's more important to compare your workload against the hardware because there are very wide disparities between how these cores operate. The Xeons are much better about caching small jobs while the Opterons rock at big job throughput (think overnight SQL).

We use both of these systems in our environment and, in the end, it's most important that the hardware fit the job.

-Matt

[zkysr]

I price these things all the time...

and I benchmark this stuff all the time and a dell with xeon and hp with amd always price about the same. Also, you can get a better price with HP if you can cut a deal with a reseller. AMD beats Intel in virtually every benchmark you can think of. Intel dual core implementation is more for marketing against AMD than any real performance gain. A second core and 64bit on Intel barely makes a difference compared to single core 32bit. Intel needs to get some better interconnect technology than the 20 year old FSB model they are using. Only AMD will give you real value and performance gains at this time when it comes to 64bit and dual core. HP servers are better than Dell in general, so I would go with HP/AMD any day over Dell. The best X64 systems is the Sun x4100. 1u with everything hot swap, redundant, and the most advanced management features, the Sun X4100 is awesome.

[jakedelorey]

VIKRAM!!

Vikram please contact me if possible. [e-mail]

Er.. Really?

Just checked dell.com
The config you reported for a PE2850 - 5XDisks, 4GB RAM, Dual Proc, Dual Core - is $8,086.00; i.e 2 thousand CHEAPER than HP
Go to
http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/pedge_2850?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz

[MattLPMP]

Prices are on parity

Eh, I don't think there's a big argument to be made on price; for one, you're not talking apples to apples -- it's virtually impossible to "align" an Opteron server with a Xeon server without turning to performance specs and considering the server's role.

For kicks, I just config'ed and quoted a DL385 (2x2x2.4GHz) from HP against a PE2850 (2x2x3.0GHz), each with 4GB of RAM, 5x72GB 10k SCSI, and 3-year, 4-hour 24x7 support. The systems are within $100 shipped, which means you're basically at the whimsy of your reps to determine which is a better deal.

Performance-wise, however, it's more important to compare your workload against the hardware because there are very wide disparities between how these cores operate. The Xeons are much better about caching small jobs while the Opterons rock at big job throughput (think overnight SQL).

We use both of these systems in our environment and, in the end, it's most important that the hardware fit the job.

-Matt

[zkysr]

I price these things all the time...

and I benchmark this stuff all the time and a dell with xeon and hp with amd always price about the same. Also, you can get a better price with HP if you can cut a deal with a reseller. AMD beats Intel in virtually every benchmark you can think of. Intel dual core implementation is more for marketing against AMD than any real performance gain. A second core and 64bit on Intel barely makes a difference compared to single core 32bit. Intel needs to get some better interconnect technology than the 20 year old FSB model they are using. Only AMD will give you real value and performance gains at this time when it comes to 64bit and dual core. HP servers are better than Dell in general, so I would go with HP/AMD any day over Dell. The best X64 systems is the Sun x4100. 1u with everything hot swap, redundant, and the most advanced management features, the Sun X4100 is awesome.

[jakedelorey]

VIKRAM!!

Vikram please contact me if possible. [e-mail]