Re: for linux, which CPUs are almost always faster than which other CPUs?
- From: Unruh <unruh-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 21:33:23 GMT
Bennett Haselton <bennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Is there any way to find out how to compare two different CPUs for the
purposes of running a Web server (other than doing benchmarks which
are not practical in this situation), just based on the model of the
CPU?
Everywhere I've asked this before, people have said things like "There
are no absolute ways to compare CPUs because there are too many
factors. The only reliable way to do a comparison is to run your app
on both, and make careful observations. It takes time and work and
there are no shortcuts."
And then I'll ask someone about comparing CPU A and CPU B, and they
say, "Well of COURSE cpu A is almost always faster, EVERYBODY knows
THAT!"
OK, so *that* was the kind of answer I was looking for the first time
around -- the comparisons between CPUs where "everybody knows" that
one is faster. Like, everybody knows that a Xeon is faster than a
Pentium (with similar clock rates), but that seems like the kind of
information people pick up ad hoc over the years. To leap-frog the
process of spending years accumulating that sort of information in
bits and pieces, what is the closest thing to a sorted list of CPUs,
where 90% of the time, the higher CPU in the list is the faster one?
Could it be as simple as looking at the price list for CPUs all from
the same seller, and assuming that the more expensive ones are faster
for most purposes?
The only rules of thumb that I have to use are (a) if everything else
in the processor name is the same, then the one with the higher MHz is
faster, and (b) if two dedicated servers offered by the same hosting
company are the same in every respect except for the processor, then
the more expensive one is probably faster. (But, that doesn't work
for comparing servers across different hosting companies since their
markup amount varies, so $59 one at one company may actually be
faster than a $69 one somewhere else.)
For example, from 3 different hosting companies right now I could get
a server with a Celeron 420, a 2.4 GHz Pentium or a "Celeron 2.6" for
about the same price. Are there any two of these where I can say,
almost always, that one is faster than the other? For example,
according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celeron
the Celeron 420 has a 1.6 GHz clock rate. I assume that what the
other hosting company is calling a "Celeron 2.6" is a Celeron that
runs at 2.6 GHz, even though the Wikipedia article doesn't list any
Celeron model that runs at 2.6 GHz. So is the "Celeron 2.6" almost
certainly the better deal than the Celeron 420? And how would I
compare either of those to the Pentium?
Web hosting has almost nothing to do with the cpu. It is a network and disk
bound activity AFAIK. It is like asking whether a porsche or a lamborgini
is faster when what you want to do quickly is to dig holes in the ground.
Bennett.
- Prev by Date: Re: rsync - exclude dirs from source but keep all files on target
- Next by Date: Re: Fedora 10 DPMS
- Previous by thread: Re: for linux, which CPUs are almost always faster than which other CPUs?
- Next by thread: Re: for linux, which CPUs are almost always faster than which other CPUs?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
