| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] dual versus quad core
Cores are effectively cpus. Xen will use them just as it would a 4
cpu machine. I noticed in 'xm info' it does keep track of cores, vs
sockets, but I am not sure if it does anything with that information
right now. In the worst case its like having 4 cpus, which as you
pointed out is much cheaper this way (duel socket duel core) than
with a 4 socket system.
We do Super computing and allot of the new systems are duel core and
we have users see them the same as cpus, because well on the silicon
they are effectively.
Brock Palen
Center for Advanced Computing
brockp@xxxxxxxxx
(734)936-1985
On Jun 29, 2007, at 3:39 PM, George Herson wrote:
Of the below, is the dual core or the quad core system more
cost-effective (everything else being equal)? This server's mission
will be to run backup (ie, in the event of a disaster) web and mysql
services separated by Xen.
More generally, what are Xen's issues vis-a-vis cpu cores? Does/
will it
take good advantage of a quad core cpu? Dual core?
(We confirmed that the IBM System x3550 is listed at
http://hcl.xensource.com/?showall=yes&subtab=systems as VT-capable and
Xen-tested.)
(i'm not subscribed to the mailing list so pls include my address on
your email.)
Thank you!
system 1: dual core:
IBM System x3550 $10,663.25 with
Dual Core Intel Xeon 5160 3.0GHz 2x2MB L2 Cache Dual Core Processor
Addl Dual Core Intel Xeon 5160 3.0GHz 2x2MB L2 Cache Xeon
Processor
system 2: quad core:
IBM System x3550 $11,049.15 with
Quad-Core Intel Xeon Proc E5345 (2.33GHz 8MB L2 1333MHz 80W)
Addl Quad-Core Intel Xeon Processor E5345 (2.33GHz 1333MHz 80w)
best,
George Herson
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home