If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Performance difference on single vs multi core
I posted this originally on alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd
Since there are a number of people over here that know about CPU's they might be able to enlighten me on what is happening here. I'm not picking on AMD, I just don't have any Intel's to test it on. We are seeing some significant performance differences on single vs multi-core processors on AMD chips. We have a database application that we are running on XP which also does regression analysis. I have asked the manufacturer of the software if they have seen this, but they have not. They are using Clarion from SoftVelocity to build the application. on some systems I know the core others I do not AMD Athlon Socket 939 (single) 4000+ 102 secs AMD Athlon 64 X2 (Toledo) (single) 4800+ 145 secs AMD Athlon 64 (Unknown) (dual) 3500+ 184 secs AMD Black Edition (Brisbane) (dual) 5000+ 780 secs (Overclocked to 3GHz) AMD Athlon 64 (Brisbane) (dual) 5200 + AMD Quad Phenom 9950 810 secs We then installed the application on an operating system installed as guest in VMWare AMD Quad Phenom 9950 92 secs Any idea on what is going on here. This really doesn't make sense. I would expect maybe a little performance hit but 5 to 6 times different.. The only hint I can see of the issue may be the run made on the Toledo. While it's clock speed is faster It's performance is still worse than a 4000+. My understanding is that a Toledo is a dual core with one core disabled. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Performance difference on single vs multi core
wrote:
I posted this originally on alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd Since there are a number of people over here that know about CPU's they might be able to enlighten me on what is happening here. I'm not picking on AMD, I just don't have any Intel's to test it on. We are seeing some significant performance differences on single vs multi-core processors on AMD chips. We have a database application that we are running on XP which also does regression analysis. I have asked the manufacturer of the software if they have seen this, but they have not. They are using Clarion from SoftVelocity to build the application. on some systems I know the core others I do not AMD Athlon Socket 939 (single) 4000+ 102 secs AMD Athlon 64 X2 (Toledo) (single) 4800+ 145 secs AMD Athlon 64 (Unknown) (dual) 3500+ 184 secs AMD Black Edition (Brisbane) (dual) 5000+ 780 secs (Overclocked to 3GHz) AMD Athlon 64 (Brisbane) (dual) 5200 + AMD Quad Phenom 9950 810 secs We then installed the application on an operating system installed as guest in VMWare AMD Quad Phenom 9950 92 secs Any idea on what is going on here. This really doesn't make sense. I would expect maybe a little performance hit but 5 to 6 times different.. The only hint I can see of the issue may be the run made on the Toledo. While it's clock speed is faster It's performance is still worse than a 4000+. My understanding is that a Toledo is a dual core with one core disabled. Start by running a pure compute benchmark. SuperPI runs on a single core. Select enough digits of PI when running it, so that the size of the cache does not influence the results. For example, run 1 million digits and 32 million digits. http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/ http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/super_pi_mod-1.5.zip AMD processors feature Cool N' Quiet, use a "CPU driver" downloadable from the AMD site, and in the hardware, have a programmable multiplier. By making multiplier and voltage changes (FID and VID), the processor can change from a full power state, to a power saving state, up to something like 30 times a second. When there are problems, sometimes an application will end up "stuttering". For example, Anandtech, in their last series of movie playback benchmarks, found a difference in playback smoothness, with CNQ enabled and disabled. So they had to run benchmarks under both conditions, on the assumption a ****ed off customer would turn off CNQ, to get the smoothness they wanted. This causes a higher average power dissipation on the processor (important in the HTPC market). I don't know anything about which application is best to monitor the processor state. There is an AMD Power Monitor application here, and presumably it can tell you the currently used FID and VID. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/..._15259,00.html Maybe after you've benchmarked with SuperPI, and compare clock speeds from the various processors, you'll get a better feeling for where to look next. Perhaps there are peripheral differences between boxes ? Faster disks ? More memory for an application level cache ? And so on. I have run into the odd person, who has done everything to set up their AMD processor in terms of CNQ, CPU drivers, Microsoft patches and the like. And for some reason, the processor stays in "low gear". Which is why it would be nice to be able to monitor what speed the thing is running at. Also, try running your processor hardware descriptions through the list here. The "Toledo Single" stops at 4000+. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors AMD has their own list of processors, but surprisingly, choose not to list everything they've ever made. (And I'm not referring to the one-off lots they ship to OEMs - their server processor list is far from complete.) http://www.amdcompare.com/ Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Performance difference on single vs multi core
On Oct 29, 4:35*pm, Paul wrote:
wrote: I posted this originally on alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd Since there are a number of people over here that know about CPU's they might be able to enlighten me on what is happening here. *I'm not picking on AMD, I just don't have any Intel's to test it on. We are seeing some significant performance differences on single vs multi-core processors on AMD chips. We have a database application that we are running on XP which also does regression analysis. I have asked the manufacturer of the software if they have seen this, but they have not. *They are using Clarion from SoftVelocity to build the application. on some systems I know the core others I do not *AMD Athlon Socket 939 (single) 4000+ * * * 102 secs *AMD Athlon 64 X2 (Toledo) (single) 4800+ * * * * *145 secs AMD Athlon 64 (Unknown) (dual) 3500+ * * * * * * * 184 secs AMD *Black Edition (Brisbane) (dual) 5000+ * * * * 780 secs (Overclocked to 3GHz) AMD *Athlon 64 (Brisbane) (dual) 5200 + AMD Quad Phenom 9950 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *810 secs We then installed the application on an operating system installed as guest in VMWare AMD *Quad Phenom 9950 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *92 secs Any idea on what is going on here. *This really doesn't make sense. *I would expect maybe a little performance hit but 5 to 6 times different.. The only hint I can see of the issue may be the run made on the Toledo. * While it's clock speed is faster It's performance is still worse than a 4000+. *My understanding is that a Toledo is a dual core with one core disabled. Start by running a pure compute benchmark. SuperPI runs on a single core. Select enough digits of PI when running it, so that the size of the cache does not influence the results. For example, run 1 million digits and 32 million digits. http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/ http://www.xtremesystems.com/pi/super_pi_mod-1.5.zip AMD processors feature Cool N' Quiet, use a "CPU driver" downloadable from the AMD site, and in the hardware, have a programmable multiplier. By making multiplier and voltage changes (FID and VID), the processor can change from a full power state, to a power saving state, up to something like 30 times a second. When there are problems, sometimes an application will end up "stuttering". For example, Anandtech, in their last series of movie playback benchmarks, found a difference in playback smoothness, with CNQ enabled and disabled. So they had to run benchmarks under both conditions, on the assumption a ****ed off customer would turn off CNQ, to get the smoothness they wanted. This causes a higher average power dissipation on the processor (important in the HTPC market). I don't know anything about which application is best to monitor the processor state. There is an AMD Power Monitor application here, and presumably it can tell you the currently used FID and VID. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...0,,30_182_871_... Maybe after you've benchmarked with SuperPI, and compare clock speeds from the various processors, you'll get a better feeling for where to look next. Perhaps there are peripheral differences between boxes ? Faster disks ? More memory for an application level cache ? And so on. I have run into the odd person, who has done everything to set up their AMD processor in terms of CNQ, CPU drivers, Microsoft patches and the like. And for some reason, the processor stays in "low gear". Which is why it would be nice to be able to monitor what speed the thing is running at. Also, try running your processor hardware descriptions through the list here. The "Toledo Single" stops at 4000+. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors AMD has their own list of processors, but surprisingly, choose not to list everything they've ever made. (And I'm not referring to the one-off lots they ship to OEMs - their server processor list is far from complete.) http://www.amdcompare.com/ * * Paul Thanks for the reply. I'm probably going to re-install the 5000+ chip in the system this weekend and give it another whirl. Right now it's running the phenom processor with VMWare. But I would still like to find out what the issue is. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Seeing performance differences on single vs multi-core | [email protected] | AMD x86-64 Processors | 0 | October 27th 08 06:12 PM |
Best Multi-chip multi-core mobo question | Mike[_7_] | General | 4 | May 14th 07 08:11 AM |
Which Notebook to buy? Intel Centrino, Core DUO, Core Duo 2, AMD Turion, Single Core | [email protected] | General | 4 | August 31st 06 02:11 AM |
Opteron - single dual core vs two single cores | CharlesBlackstone | General | 17 | August 19th 06 08:17 PM |