which one is better?

1 p4 2.2 ghz, 512k cache
2 p3 1.1 ghz, 512k cache

cost wise, for CPu and MB, the 2 CPU P3 is 30% more expensive.

thanks

Go with the P4, because it's newer technology and a dual is never 2X the speed. The P4 2.2GHz is a hell of a machine, we are building some to launch later this month and they scream!

What do they scream exactly?

WARNING, server crash imminent ? :stickout

Defenitly the P4, as 2 x 1,1 is not equel to 1 x 2,2 when it comes to processor speed.

heeh they are screaming give me more processes or else will self-destruct in 5 minutes ;-)

A dual P3 1 ghz system using 512k cache CPU's (which I don't think you can have a dual P3 system with 256k CPU's) will out perform a P4 2.2 ghz.

Numbers are not everything and these types of questions come up all the time and everyone just blindly repeats what Intel tells them on TV with their little aliens. New technology means nothing when it's not as good and higher numbers don't always mean faster computers. Just like a 4 cylinder turbo engine will almost always beat any 6 cylinder non turbo engine in speed.

The P3 CPU was and still is the most optimized CPU for internet use that has/does exist. Not even a year ago there have been tests done on dual PIII 866 mhz systems that have blown away XP1700's and P4 1.6's.... and not by small margins either. There is a reason why the P3 1 ghz 512k CPU is still amost as much as the P4 1.6.

Also, it hasn't been that long ago that Intel released the P3 1.3 ghz 512k CPU.. and even now it's very hard to find and runs almost $200. High end server manufacturers have requested these P3 CPU's to remain on the market and thus why Intel produced a P3 CPU somewhere after a YEAR of having P4's on the market.

So believe what you will and people will argue they've ran both and bigger numbers mean faster systems.. but a good system built with a dual P3 1 ghz system just can't be beat by any P4 on the market as of right now.

Well... as I know ...
a P3 1.1 Ghz is faster than a P4 1.4 ghz ...
and 2xP3 @ 1.1 Ghz ... wil run like a P3 2 Ghz... or so...
and you have 1 Mb of cache in total... and two diferent processors... with independed pipelines... you know...
I you put a decent OS (linux 2.4,unix/bsd,win2k server) ... the P3's will be faster ... maybe as fast as the 30% diference in price... maybe a little more...
Maybe you can Buy a faster P4 ... or a P4 with lots of DDR400 memory or something like .... you know ... not only the CPU make a server fast, memory play a BIG role here.

Regards.

I'd also have to vote for the p4. A lot of software is more limited when it comes to dual cpu, and dont forget less power consumption, less heat, less stress in general if you ask me. You win in every aspect by the looks of it, also with 1 less cpu, 1 less heatsync, 1 less fan, 1 less thing to break.

Personaly I would go with a single P3 (True server class).

I love dual CPU systems. I'd go for the dual P3 1.1 if the cost were the same. Since I'm on a tight budget, for 30% more I'd probably just go with the 2.2 since performance wise it will be close.

Well... actually... maybe with this 30% dif.
you can buy a dual motherboard .... (for P4) ... and then any day... you can buy another P4 ... and have dual power :D

Regards

Except wouldn't you have to use P4 Xeons do do a dual P4 system?

And then you have to get the second CPU to the colo, take the server offline to install the new CPU, do a new kernel to support the second CPU, etc. If it were me, I would rather get the hardware (CPU's) setup from the start than have to take an active server offline later, especially if the colo is any distance away.

Originally posted by panopticon
Except wouldn't you have to use P4 Xeons do do a dual P4 system?

And then you have to get the second CPU to the colo, take the server offline to install the new CPU, do a new kernel to support the second CPU, etc. If it were me, I would rather get the hardware (CPU's) setup from the start than have to take an active server offline later, especially if the colo is any distance away.

That's very true :)

So, if I have the money... I will pay for such system :bawling:

Regards,
Choon

Originally posted by asyui8
which one is better?
1 p4 2.2 ghz, 512k cache
2 p3 1.1 ghz, 512k cache


Which is better for what?

Assuming you are talking 'standard web server' performance, then I'd select the dual CPU's. However, the choice really depends on what you are doing. For a games machine, or home PC, then a faster CPU would probably 'perform' better than a dual machine. That aside, many performance indicators still show that P4's simply do not 'peform' as well as clock-speed and marketing would have you believe.

In many 'standard web server' situations, the raw speed of the CPU(s) is not going to be a bottleneck, and so having 2 CPU's will reduce the processor queue length, allow threads to be processed simultaneously and hence increase the 'server performance'. Obviously 2 x 1.1 does not equate to the same 'speed' as 1 x 2.2, but often the dual CPU's would perform more efficently.