Coppermine vs. Xeon

[Guest]

Curious -

1000mhz Coppermine vs a 1000mhz Xeon.

Stats as I believe them to be:
Coppermine:
1000mhz
133mhz FSB
32kb L1
256kb L2
Xeon:
1000mhz
133 mhz FSB (assumption, don't know)
16kb L1
256kb L2

By those stats, the Coppermine should perform better, yah? Why the extravagent price tag for the Xeon name? Am I missing something?

TIA

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Highside on 03/30/01 04:28 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Crashman]

Xeons are made for Slot 2 server boards. If you own a Slot 2 server, you have no other choice! That's why they are so expensive.
So why do companies use such an expensive configuration to begin with when they design servers? Because the Xeon can be had with 2mb or more cache, and I believe they support a larger number of processors per board than the PIII. So they also have good name recognition in the Server industry.

Suicide is painless...........

 

[dhlucke]

If I remember correctly you can get hefty boards that support 4+ XEONS with anywhere between 500 KB and 4 MB of cache. But they'll cost you a first born AND an arm and a leg.

<font color=red>Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.</font color=red>
Pablo Picasso

 

[Crashman]

I've heard of a much larger number, but I don't want to say it because I might sound silly!

Suicide is painless...........

 

[jclw]

There are many flavours of PIII Xeons:

"Back End" Xeons support configurations with 8 and more processors, are available with 1 or 2MB of L2 on-die cache, and are currently available in 700 & 900MHz versions.

"Mid Tier" Xeons support configurations of 4 -> 8 processors, and are also available with 1 or 2MB of cache at 700 & 900MHz.

"Front End" Xeons support configurations of 1 or 2 processors, come with 256k of L2 cache, and are available @: 1 GHz, 933 MHz, 866 MHz, 800 MHz, 733 MHz, 667 MHz, and 600 MHz.

The P4 Xeons (named: Foster) should be out soon. Tyan had a i860 based board for dual Fosters at CeBIT <A HREF="http://www.tecchannel.de/news/20010326/thema20010326-4028.html" target="_new">http://www.tecchannel.de/news/20010326/thema20010326-4028.html</A>, and rumor has it Intel will release the i870 chipset (which will support up to eight Fosters) in a couple of weeks.

As for speed, I'm not sure how the 256k Xeons stack up to a 256k Copppermine but I do know that the 1 & 2MB versions are a lot faster crunching SETI@Home workunits. The 1MB Xeons average 4 CPU cycles/FLOP while the Coppermines average 6 CPU cycles/FLOP (Therefor the 1MB Xeons are 50% faster at the same clock speed at crunching numbers).

- JW

 

[Guest]

Ultimately, the Xeon is nothing more than a PIII with more cache and the ability to run more of them. Same core. And, while it only costs Intel slightly more money to produce Xeons with even 2MB L2, you pay out the arse for it because of the "Xeon" branding.

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

you are wrong, Xeon is about $3 more on www.pricewatch.com(Xeon 733MHz)
a lot of companies have no choice in using Xeon's it is cheaper than other mp solutions and the (supposedly low cost)Amd mp solution is not readily available in mass quantities.

Q: who branded the "L" on your forhead?

"Amd cpu...Gone in 2 secs flat, it truly is a fast chip!"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by AmdMeltdown on 03/31/01 02:13 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Guest]

Shut the f*ck up you f*cking idiot! Your selection of an aging 733 with only 256k cache isn't, as you well know, not an accurate portrayal of the cost of Xeons. Rather than comparing the cost of a "has been" 733, lets look at the cost of a 1GHz Xeon with 256K in comparison to a regular 1GHz PIII. Also, compare the cost of a regular 1GHz PIII to a large cache 1GHz PIII. And, while you're at it, look at the difference in cost between a 700MHz PIII and 700MHz Xeon with 2MB L2. Why don't you report back with your findings, ass!

You obviously have difficulties reading. My point, which you missed, is that it doesn't cost Intel much more money to manufacture a large cache Xeon than a regular PIII yet THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN COST. When you buy a Xeon you're paying for the Xeon brand.

 

[AmdMELTDOWN]

why get all hysterical? it's obvious if you want more cache you have to pay more cash. Can't afford go elsewhere, but don't knock the Co. just because of their brand recognition.



"Amd cpu...Gone in 2 secs flat, it truly is a fast chip!"

 

[Guest]

I'm with meltdown
cache=cash therefore
cashe^, cash^

 

[Guest]

No doubt, more cache = more cash. But it's a rippoff! It's still a freakin' PIII. In most cases a 1GHz T-bird is faster than a $4k Xeon. Oh, but it's a Xeon, I'm sorry.... And, Intel let's you use more than two of them. What a scam! I'm not saying Intel shouldn't charge more for a Xeon, but not the absurd prices they get. At least with the upcoming Hammer processors there'll be architectural differences between the desktop and server chips, truly justifying the extra cost for a Sledgehammer.

 

[peteb]

wtf?

'And, Intel let's you use more than two of them. What a scam!'

Are you on drugs? It's a scam because a company with significantly longer linage in the economy SMP server market decides to charge you more because they developed a chip architecture that will permit SMP to 8 or more CPUs?

Take a look at the markets that the intel platform is perfoming in for SMP (outside of NT filesharing) and I think you'll find them the cheap, kiddie end of SMP processing.

Once AMD have a mature 8 way architecture available, we'll start comparing $$$.

I think AMD are a great company, their Athlons are a great chip, but they still have a very long way to go to break into the SMP market. Initial release of a 2 cpu chipset is not going to push people's buttons. It is okay for your worstation, but you are not going to see them in anyone's datacenter.

Face facts, Xeon is not aimed at Mr Joe Public, it is aimed at Mr Corporation with his banks of file servers and SQL databases. Please don't confuse a retail/desktop pricing strategy with a commercial datacenter pricing model.

Pete.

-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details

 

[Guest]

ack! can't do an 'NT' post?? silly