AMD Opteron vs. Intel Xeon: Database Performance Shootout
by Anand Lal Shimpi, Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on March 2, 2004 2:11 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Hyper Threading
Intel's Hyper Threading technology has been widely accepted in the enterprise and desktop markets, to the point where the vast majority of systems ship with Hyper Threading enabled and leave it that way.
Our tests have shown that Hyper Threading improved performance 3 - 5% on average and thus we left it enabled for all of our tests here.
The Tests
We ran two sets of tests for this comparison: an updated version of our own home-grown tests on the AnandTech Forums Database, as well as another more strenuous test representative of enterprise-class transactional database serving applications. We will discuss the two tests in greater detail in the coming pages, but first the basic hardware configuration for our tests:
AMD Opteron 848/248 and Intel Xeon/Xeon MP (Prestonia/Gallatin)
4GB DDR333 (NUMA was enabled for the opteron)
8 x 36GB 15,000RPM Ultra320 SCSI drives in RAID-0
Windows 2003 Enterprise Server
Days, and then weeks went by as we researched and regression-tested various benchmark methodologies in order to come up with fair, repeatable and, most of all, real world database benchmarks. In the past, we've used a trace playback methodology to stress the database. While it served its purpose for the hardware that was tested, it was time for a change. This time around, we wanted to have two different tests: one that represented an average database load, like the AnandTech Forums; and, the other that represented an enterprise level workload.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
Blackbrrd - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Hmm... the site below has some info about Numa (non unified memory architecture), and it looks like the os you're using isn't Numa enabled... Is this correct? Is there any real world benefit from Numa with Opteron?http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=opt...
zarjad - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Could you speculate which way the advantage should be going in a BI benchmark (say TPC-H type of a test)? These are long running queries with gigabytes size tables.Jason Clark - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
We started playing around with a couple of mysql benchmarks a few weeks ago namely OSDB and some new multithreaded benchmarks from MySQL themselves. We're hoping to get some valid tests that produce real results in the future.Cheers.
Jason Clark - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
In fact we did some recent testing to start out 64bit linux testing and mysql 4.0.17 on suse 64 had a segmentation fault starting <WINK> known issue for mysql as well... <WINK> <WINK>Jason Clark - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Steveoc, it hardly runs like a dog. Let's not turn this into a one sided os war :) The test make sense as they are, but a 64bit article is on the books for later. We've already been playing around with Suse 64bit and some others and whether you agree or not 64bit is still immature, period full stop. Support is there but it has some maturing to do.steveoc - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
All these tests show is that Opteron, running Windows, runs like a Dog. As if we couldnt predict that result already ...The tests will only make sense once you are running 64bit linux. In fact, Id love to see a test of Dual Xeon + Win2003 + MSSQL vs Dual Opteron + 64bit Gentoo + 64bit MySQL .. that would be very interesting indeed.
For anyone out there claiming that '64bit software has a looong way to go', that is only true for Windows. Unix (and Linux) have been running 64bit for a long time now, and the AMD64 has very good support under Linux.
dweigert - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
Seeing the difference whether NUMA us used or not would be *VERY* interesting. Also comparing against other NUMA aware OS's (Linux 2.63 or better kernel, or whatever) would be a good test too.hirschma - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
#25 - Seems that it is not for sale to the general public, not that I could find. If anyone knows where/how to get one, please let me know.I have an application that is quite expensive and is licensed by the box, no matter how many CPUs it has ;) I'm guessing that building a low-end quad would give me more throughput per $$ than a second license/second box.
Jonathan
Jason Clark - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
We're also looking at some 64bit .NET benchmarks as we're real close to having a real-world application that we can hammer.Jason Clark - Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - link
An interesting article would be the effect of NUMA on enterprise level applications. GamePC did a bit of a write up on it, but it was limited to desktop and synthetic benchmarks. Would any of you be interested in seeing the effects of NUMA on and off on the sql tests?