Computer Power User Article - Opteron Vs. Xeon

Page 1 of 9

Subscribe Today | Contact Us | Re
Home | Customer Service | Forums | Article Search | Product Reviews | Shop C

Opteron Vs. Xeon

Spotlight June 2005 Vol.5 Issue 6 Page(s) 64-69 in print issue
Email This Print This View My Personal Library Add To My Personal Library
The Workstation Juggernauts Do Battle
Flash back to 1998 when Intels Pentium II Xeon had just emerged on the scene, fusing the advantages of the Pentium II with the Pentium Pro, Intels previous workstation flagship. AMD was still little more than an annoyance to Intel at that point, selling its K6 architecture as an alternative desktop solution. Although AMD stood up well against Intels mainstream line, there simply wasnt any competition when it came to high-end workstations and servers. It goes without saying that times have certainly changed. AMDs Athlon surfaced in 1999, immediately scoring fans amongst the gaming community and driving Intels once-astronomical prices down. Athlon XP followed, earning AMD further accolades. But despite continued success on the desktop, AMD trudged on without an enterprise-worthy contender. Sure, it let loose with the Athlon MP dual-processor architecture, but that design never really convinced IT managers they should stray from Intels established infrastructure. Besides, Xeon was already a full NetBurst-based core, similar to the Pentium 4, delivering high clock speeds and copious bandwidth. At the time those were the features that sold processors. The ASUS K8N-DL is a great platform on which to build an entry-level workstation. Then, in 2003, Opteron hit store shelves, going on to thoroughly impress journalists and early adopters alike. By combining components of the preceding K7 core, an integrated memory controller, and 64-bit software extensions, AMD pulled even with Xeons performance characteristics in many cases and zipped right past in others. At last there were two workstation candidates worth pitting against each other. Even the single-core Opteron is a complex beast, with 1MB of L2 and 128KB of L1 cache. A Broadside Exchange
Epic battles are the subject of celebrated lore. From sports events to Wild West shootouts to battleship showdowns, theres nothing quite like two titans going toe to toe. After a relatively uncontested run at the top, Intel had finally met the Monitor to its Merrimac in AMDs Opteron. It seemed such a capable competitor took Intel by surprise. Without even touching performance in a 64-bit environment (operating system support wasnt quite there yet), Opteron laid down impressive 32-bit numbers that reflected a large on-die cache, low-latency memory accesses, and rapid inter-chip communications enabled through HyperTransport.
http://www.computerpoweruser.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles/archive/c0506/3. 10/17/2005

Page 2 of 9

Although perhaps caught off guard, Intel wasted little time in preparing a comeback. Its 90nm manufacturing process was nearly ready for desktop retail consumption (finally realized in the Q1 2004), and Intel expected higher clock frequencies, lower power consumption, and enough flexibility to add such features as L2 cache. As it turned out, 90nm was certainly able to help bolster operating speed, but it didn't do much for the architecture's mounting power and thermal limitations. Fortunately, new features were added. Prescott, the desktop variant of Intels new architecture, emerged with 1MB of L2, a 16KB L1 data cache, and SSE3 instruction support. The stage was officially set for Xeon to strike back.
AMDs Opteron Dissected The naming scheme assigned to AMDs Opteron is somewhat arbitrary, yet its easy enough to follow. All Opterons feature 1MB of L2 cache and populate a 940-pin socket. Where each model differs is in clock frequency. An Opteron x40 (where x represents the number 1, 2, or 8) runs at 1.4GHz. The x42 bumps that number up to 1.6GHz, and so on, up to the x52 models running at 2.6GHz. Beyond core speed, Opteron processors are also divided into three families according to their multiprocessing capabilities. Workstations with just one chip tap the 100 series. Dual-processor setups require models in the 200 series. AMDs 800 series is reserved for four- and eight-way servers. As you ascend the hierarchy, price increases accordingly. Despite their multiprocessing differences, every Opteron features three HyperTransport links with which to communicate. On a singleprocessor platform, all three links may be used to attach core logic devices, such as PCI-X or PCI Express tunnels. A DP configuration leverages one link for inter-processor connectivity, while the other two support I/O devices. Some of the most intricate motherboards feature multiple chipset components attached to different processors through HyperTransport, enabling innovative features, such as dual x16 PCI-E ports with SLI support on Tyans K8WE. Although you can buy an Opteron through the channel for less money, AMDs boxed product gives you a retail heatsink, too. As mentioned, Opteron processors also boast an integrated memory controller operating at the host frequency. Because its part of the silicon die, the controller isnt easily upgraded and as such still tops out with two, 64-bit channels of DDR400 memory. AMD claims that Opteron runs best using older DDR memory modules anyway, due to their timing advantages.

The culmination of AMD's subsequent revisions, advances in manufacturing, and progressive speed improvements is the Opteron 252. Running at 2.6GHz on a new 90nm lithography process, the 252 is a revision E chip. The 252 wields SSE3 support and an improved memory controller. A 1.4V-core voltage reduces the its power consumption, easing thermal constraints, too. Just bear in mind that recognizing a revision E Opteron requires an updated motherboard BIOS. For Opteron processors manufactured after May 2004, a BIOS update will also enable PowerNow! technology, says Pat Patla, AMDs director of server and workstation marketing. In large server clusters, the addition means reduced air conditioning costs. Workstations are more likely to run cooler and quieter thanks to clock throttling capabilities switched on by the PowerNow! feature. Intels Xeon Analyzed Intels dual-processor contender, the Xeon DP, was ill-prepared to face off against Opteron back in 2003. No time was wasted in improving the workstation chip, though. Cache was doubled from 512KB to 1MB. Frontside bus speeds were accelerated from 400 to 533MHz, and core frequencies broke the 3GHz barrier. But that

Page 3 of 9

still wasnt quite enough to topple Opteron. Intels Xeon DP is architecturally similar to the Pentium 4, but it utilizes a completely different interface designed with multiprocessing in mind. Finally, early in 2004, Intel presented the Nocona core. Heavily laden with new functionality, Intel had an answer to AMDs challenge from a year prior. Recognizing that AMDs point-to-point topology and integrated memory controller gave Opteron an I/O advantage, Intel made a special effort to again augment bus frequency, this time to 800MHz. A larger L1 data cache further improved the processors responsiveness. For a time the addition of SSE3 distinguished Xeons multimedia alacrity, though AMD implemented the feature into its own products a year later.
The other notable architectural improvement was DBS (DemandBased Switching), which is basically Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology for the enterprise. DBS throttled back voltage and clock speed to conserve energy. More importantly, it represented a power-saving feature that AMD didnt offer with Opteron. Another of AMDs weaknesses was platform support. Workstation systems notoriously wield powerful graphics cards and robust disk I/O subsystems. Intels PCI Express initiative signified a major step forward in this area by accelerating those critical data pathways. The Tumwater chipset emerged alongside Nocona, enabling significant bandwidth increases beyond what PCI-X or AGP could previously handle. Unfortunately, backward compatibility with those standards wasnt possible. Graphics card manufacturers led the way in adopting PCI-E, and Intel now expects that more than 50 PCI-E devices will be available by the end of this year. As you would expect, exclusive support for such a pervasive technology lent considerable credence to Intels direction. Intel didnt stop there, however. The latest iteration of its Xeon DP processor centers on the Irwindale core, which in many ways is similar to the Pentium 4 600-series of processors with 2MB of L2 cache. Irwindale is an interim solution while the dual-core Xeon is polished, and the processor benefits from an 800MHz frontside bus, 64-bit capabilities, NX-bit support, DBS, and the same beefy E7525 platform introduced previously. The fastest model operates at 3.6GHz. The processor is great competition for AMDs Opteron 252.

Another powerful workstation board, the Tyan K8WE is SLI capable, sports dual Gigabit Ethernet, and comes with optional Ultra320 SCSI.
AMD Emphasizes Dual-Core Workstations Both AMD and Intel have had dual-core processor technology on their radars for a while now. Intel planned to assault the desktop market first with its Pentium D, which has already made a debut in limited press sampling. AMD, hoping to duplicate Opterons initial success, chose to focus on the server and workstation dual-core variant, leaving mainstream desktops for the last half of 2005.
AMDs approach seems to make the most sense. Much of the software written for workstations and servers is already multithreaded, meaning that upper echelon of content designers, administrators, and programmers stand to benefit from dual-core technology immediately. AMDs cause is further strengthened by platform support. Dual-core Opteron and Athlon 64 processors are fully socket-compatible with existing Socket 940 and Socket 939 configurations. So long as the motherboard can support existing 90nm Opteron processors, a BIOS update guarantees that the new chip will be properly recognized and utilized. How did AMD manage such a smooth transition? According to Patla, the architecture was conceptualized in 1999 with dual-core in mind. In essence, the pieces have always been there. However,

Page 4 of 9

AMDs Damon Muzny says that only now as AMD completes its shift to 90nm manufacturing is a single die with two cores reasonable to produce. The dual-core Opteron architecture mates two processing cores, each featuring 64KB of instruction cache, 64KB of data cache, and 1MB of L2 cache, with a system request queue and crossbar. The crossbar interfaces with three Hyper-Transport links that deliver 32Gbps of bandwidth each, along with an integrated memory controller supporting two channels of DDR400 RAM. Although both cores are forced to share the available memory, AMD claims less than a 10% performance reduction. The Hyper-Transport links are also shared, but thanks to a recent bump to 1GHz, theres plenty of bandwidth to satiate both cores. Intel: Us, Too!
With more than 10 multicore projects spanning the desktop, server, and mobile markets, Intel is being forced to prioritize. For now that means dual-core workstations will have to wait until Q1 2006. Its not all bad news, though. Intels first dual-core Xeon (Dempsey) will center on an upcoming 65nm manufacturing process, suggesting faster clock speeds and diminished power-consumption requirements. There will also be architectural improvements that may give Intel a leg up on AMD, including I/O Acceleration Technology, Virtualization Technology, and Active Management Technology. The combined effect of those new features, according to Intel, will be up to 30% more network I/O, hardware accelerated RAID functionality, the ability to run multiple OSes in independent partitions, and remote troubleshooting capabilities, which is a boon to SMBs and enterprise customers. Whereas AMD will quickly remind you that dual-core Opteron fits in todays platform infrastructure, Xeon doesnt enjoy the same luxury. For the value-conscious, such a situation is understandably frustrating, especially if you recently acquired a single-core workstation. On the flip side, however, a fresh chipset means improved features and, hopefully, increased performance. A 1,066MHz FSB is said to be on tap, as is a new Gigabit Ethernet physical layer and ESB2 enterprise-level southbridge. Those features, together with Intels improved processor architecture, will undoubtedly heat things up.

"Tumwater" is the premier workstation chipset for the Xeon DP, enabling PCI Express connectivity, DDR2 memory, and support for an 800MHz bus.
Even more compelling than the performance characteristics boasted by upcoming dual-core workstation processors is the true value that theyll enable in environments that are sensitive to threaded software. Tally up the costs of a dual-processor workstation today. Start with the requisite motherboard, add a pair of CPUs, factor in the memory necessary to keep both chips populated with 128-bit buses, and consider the other high-end components. With dual-core you start with a single-socket motherboard, which immediately shaves hundreds of dollars off the price. When you factor in the processor price, a single dualcore system enables much better threaded performance for significantly less than a traditional DP setup. A Secret Weapon Springs Forth Given Intels buzz about dual-core workstations later in 2005, you would think the technology was still some way off. In actuality, AMD is already manufacturing its dual-core Opteron in 100, 200,
While it wasnt necessarily designed for the job, ASUS tweaked the 875P chipset for workstation applications in its NCCH-DL. It lacks PCI Express but is still more than capable of battling an Opteron board.

Page 5 of 9

and 800 series trims. The incredibly complex chip consists of 205 million transistors on a 90nm process. As such its still a bit limited in how fast it operates; the flagship Opteron 875 cruises at 2.2GHz, as do the 275 and 175 models. Clearly, AMDs dual-core nomenclature deviates somewhat from established convention. Its still easy enough to decipher, though, with successive models emerging in multiples of five, each representing a 200MHz jump. According to AMD the new Opteron processors will initially carve out higher price points and over time fall to the levels of single-core chips. But that does not mean single-core CPUs will disappear any time soon. In fact, AMD recommends that workstations primarily tasked with nonthreaded applications stick with singlecore Opteron or Athlon 64 FX chips, which run at higher frequencies and, in turn, yield better performance than todays dual-core products. In Retrospect Now that AMD and Intel are competing more aggressively in the workstation market, expect to see innovation transpire at a dizzying pace. Already AMD has motivated Intel to adopt 64-bit computing, while Intels DBS pressured AMD to add PowerNow! to the Opteron. Both processing architectures populate powerful platforms, with PCI-E and massive memory support. Without question, the next step is dual-core. AMD has already laid its dual-core plans on the table, along with retail product. Intels response is nearing completion. The two companies are taking somewhat different approaches, yet theyll both forever impact the workstation market by improving value and ratcheting performance. For the time being, the epic battle between Opteron and Xeon wages on without a decisive victor. AMD clearly leads in a majority of our benchmarks, but Intels efforts to pull even are clear. No matter which way you slice it, power users will realize the most benefit as processor, graphics, and storage manufacturers one-up each other in the workstation marketplace. by Chris Angelini

Build vs. Buy

The decision to build or buy is difficult enough when it involves a gaming PC. Workstations can get even trickier. Sure, theres money to save by doing it all yourself. But do you already know what hardware best suits your needs? Engineering-design software is heavily CPU dependant, while content creation and MCAD (mechanical computer-aided design) apps often emphasize graphics performance. Wouldnt it just be better to let the professionals handle the configuration side of things? We priced out a top-tier workstation from HP and pit it against a home-brewed kit to see which one offered more value. The HP xw6200, equipped with two Xeon 3.2GHz 1MB processors, Windows XP Pro, an NVIDIA Quadro FX 3400, 2GB of registered DDR400 memory, a pair of 160GB hard drives, and a 16X DVD writer came out to $4,151, excluding the price of a display. The same setup with two retail Xeon chips, an ASUS NCT-D Tumwater motherboard, 2GB of Kingston memory, the same Quadro card, Seagate hard drives, Plextors PX-716A, an EPS12V power supply, and a $200 workstation

Page 6 of 9

chassis cost just $3,200, including Windows XP. So long as youre comfortable putting the pieces together, building your own workstation is an easy way to save a cool grand vs. a prebuilt configuration.

Workstation Applications

The differences between workstations and desktop PCs are often subtle, especially for power users who regularly run demanding applications at home. However, a handful of software applications characterize the heavy usage typical of the workstation environment.
Things are getting hairy here with Maya at work.
Among the titles youll likely find on a multiprocessor (or multicore) workstation, AMD cites computer-aided engineering tools such as MSC Softwares Nastran, Fluents computational fluid dynamics software, and ANSYS applications. Digital content creation solutions, such as Maya, SoftImage XSI, and 3D Studio Max, are also quite taxing. Electronic design automation is a focus of attention, too, as are scientific applications driven by the medical and energy industries.
You might need a workstation if you use computer-aided engineering tools, such as MSC Softwares Nastran.
No, thats not an ingame screenshot. Its a development photo from the artists at Fancy software DICE who use Maya isnt requisite for to render car models workstation in the Rallisport qualifications, games. though. Even Microsofts Windows Media Encoder 9, a free download, stands to benefit from high-caliber hardware. The same goes for iTunes and DVDShrink, both popular mainstream programs that really take off when you bring out the big guns.

What Does SLI Mean To Workstations?

Page 7 of 9

If you drool at the thought of dual-core processors, multiple graphics cards likely whet your whistle, too. Previously, cooperative-rendering workstations involved proprietary equipment, including expensive hardware and comparably priced software support. Quantum3D and Evans & Sutherland are two recognizable names in that high-end graphics market. However, the development of SLI technology makes powerful workstations more accessible by multiplying graphics performance. NVIDIA claims that MCAD (mechanical computer-aided design), DCC (digital content creation), and nonlinear video-editing applications will all run faster on workstations outfitted with an nForce Professional chipset and a pair of compatible Quadro FX graphics cards. The clear caveat is that NVIDIA is now in the position to support SLI and cultivate its benefits. Performance gains arent automatic. Rather, SLI functions as advertised only after software drivers have been optimized on a per-application basis. The current list of compatible programs is laden with games but doesnt name a single professional title. SLI has the potential to make a major impact on workstation graphics, but were
With a motherboard, such as Tyan's K8WE, and a pair of Quadro graphics cards, you can add SLI to a workstation, multiplying graphics performance.

not quite there yet.

Workstations Put To The Test
Anxious to determine which processor delivers optimal performance, we assembled three workstation configurations representing the very best from Intel and AMD. The first setup was armed with a pair of Opteron 252 processors running at 2.6GHz. ASUS K8N-DL served as the test platform, centering on NVIDIAs nForce Professional 2200 chipset. The boards single PCI Express x16 slot was populated with a GeForce 6800 Ultra graphics card, and we used 2GB of Corsairs best registered DDR400 low-latency memory. The second system leveraged two Intel Irwindale Xeon DP chips, each with 2MB of L2 cache running at 3.6GHz. ASUS was kind enough to send its NCCHDL, an 875P-based motherboard limited to AGP 8X graphics support. The original plan was to feature another PCI-E platform, but Supermicro, Iwill, and Tyan all turned down the invitation to send an E7525 motherboard for testing. Consequentially, the NCCH-DL was outfitted with an AGP 8X GeForce 6800 Ultra and 2GB of Corsair DDR400 RAM. We also took a pair of new Opteron 875 dual-core processors running at 2.2GHz

Page 8 of 9

and dropped them into the same ASUS K8N-DL motherboard with its latest BIOS. Again, one GeForce 6800 Ultra did the trick, along with 2GB of the Corsair registered DDR400 memory. Perhaps these results will surprise you. After all, the dual-core Opteron 875 only sweeps one test, the Cinebench 2003 render benchmark. Remember that a pair of 3.6GHz Xeon processors also enables four threads through Hyper-Threading and most of the applications tested seem most responsive to two threads running simultaneously. Two Opteron 252s do the best job of combining raw processing power with multithreaded alacrity here. There are indeed instances where the 875 sprints ahead, such as 2D content creation and PCMarks memory test. However, at 2.2GHz youre not going to see a major improvement unless your software is heavily optimized for multithreading. Multitasking is another story entirely. The Opteron 875 and Xeon DP systems were able to run Windows Media Encoder at full tilt with roughly 48% processor utilization, leaving plenty of power left over to run other apps.
Workstations Benchmarked SYSmark 2004 Overall Internet Content Creation 3D Creation 2D Creation Web Publication Office Productivity
Dual Opteron Dual Opteron Dual Xeon DP 252 (2.6GHz) 875 (2.2GHz) 3.6GHz (2MB) 232 213
Communication 208 Document 263 Creation Data Analysis SPECviewperf 8.01 3dsmax-03 catia-01 ensight-01 light-07 maya-01 proe-03 sw-01 ugs-04 PCMark04 188
19.56 13.18 13.5 11.89 22.02 17.54 15.75 5.268 7414
17.85 12.6 12.98 11.27 19.71 15.54 15.4 5.223 6438
19.11 12.92 13.77 10.41 21.73 18.14 16.16 5.579 6811

Page 9 of 9

CPU Memory

7122 3735

14:35 4:09 0:25

11:54 4:23 0:38

12:11 Dr. DivX Windows Media 3:39 Encoder 9 Cinebench 2003 0:38
Want more information about a topic you found of interest while reading this article? Type a word or phrase that identifies the topic and click "Search" to find relevant articles from within our editorial database. Enter A Subject (key words or a phrase):
i j k l m n ALL Words (digital AND photography) j k l m n ANY Words (digital OR photography) j k l m n Exact Match ('digital photography'- all words MUST appear together)

Search

Return to Previous Page
Copyright & Legal Information

Privacy Policy

Site Map

Contact Us

Copyright 2005 Sandhills Publishing Company U.S.A. All rights reserved.

Re: [SLE] System crash on ASUS K8NDL w/ SuSE 10.0 AMD64
Source: http://linux.derkeiler.com/MailingLists/SuSE/200601/msg02119.html
From: Stuart <sfbarbee@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:37:Joseph, Thanks, I didn't reinstall, but disabled acpid in the runlevel options. Stuart On Friday 20 January 2006 21:20, Joseph Loo wrote: > If you can, try turning off the acpid daemon. The only way I have been > sucessful is to reinstall the OS and when it boots up after the > installation, I go directly into the Yast and dsiable acpid. You can > also try booting with noapcid. > Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send email to suselinuxehelp@xxxxxxxx Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suselinuxefaq@xxxxxxxx
References: [SLE] System crash on ASUS K8NDL w/ SuSE 10.0 AMD64 From: Stuart Re: [SLE] System crash on ASUS K8NDL w/ SuSE 10.0 AMD64 From: Joseph Loo Prev by Date: Re: [SLE] postgresql on SuSE 10 Next by Date: Re: [SLE] ZIP Drive on Parallel port in SuSE 10.0 Boxed Ed. Previous by thread: Re: [SLE] System crash on ASUS K8NDL w/ SuSE 10.0 AMD64 Next by thread: Re: [SLE] System crash on ASUS K8NDL w/ SuSE 10.0 AMD64 Index(es): Date Thread