Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CAD system - Xeon or P4 Hyperthreading

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 15, 2004 12:55:58 PM

I am getting ready to order a couple of CAD systems here for my work. We purchase HP computers. The price difference between a standard hyperthreading desktop and a Xeon workstation is over $1500.

I was wondering if it is actually worth the extra money to purchase the Xeon processor over a 3.0 or 3.2 hyperthreading processor. From what i have gathered here it seems like that the Xeon on really benefits when you have dual processors.

Any help or information would be greatly appreciated.
January 15, 2004 1:23:57 PM

Why not try opteron server?At least it's worth the money spent on.

Truth is somewhere out there!
--Movie 'X Files'
January 15, 2004 1:29:16 PM

get a Dual Xeon 3.0ghz 533 system for CAD. definitely, the extra cache and smp will do wonders. Doesn't the Xeon have hyperthreading?

-------
<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 28,208</b></font color=red> :smile:
<font color=blue><b>512mbDDR - Intel P4 2.4ghz 533fsb - ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
Related resources
January 15, 2004 1:55:39 PM

Yes, Xeons have HT... not sure if all of them do or only if those above a certain speed grade do...

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 15, 2004 3:38:19 PM

I'm pretty sure all do (well, at least the 'newer' ones with the 533FSB).

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
January 16, 2004 11:36:46 AM

I'm Using a Xeon 2.0 Ghz with a Quadro2 card at my work. Mostly I use Autodesk Inventor and Mechanical Desktop. For simple Geometrys there is no noticible lag when rotating the parts. However, I modeled a heat exchange a few months back that had about 6000 surfaces. That one lagged quite a bit. I had to tell the program to hide some of the parts just to get it to be workable. Admitably this was a complex assembly, but I can't help wondering what it would be like to have a Quadro 4 or a dual setup. Just my two cents...

If an argument can't be settled in one or two paragraphs, perhaps you're anal and should just let it go...
January 16, 2004 12:10:34 PM

Quote:
In AutoCAD 2004 Dual Opteron 248 outperforms by 18% to Dual Xeon 3.06 1MB L3.

True, indeed. The only thing is that a 248 is not that cheap... it's some $1000, while Xeon 1MB is around $700... So, for a dual system, there'll probably be at least $600 price difference, I guess...

Still, Opteron seems to perform admirably in CAD! :cool:

<i>Edit: One other thing... a standart 3.2Ghz P4 will cost much, much less than a dual 3.whatever Xeon system. So a 3.2Ghz equipped with 1GB of memory is a price-effective solution for your problem... probably. Xeon is the mid-range possibility, and Opteron 248 is probably the most expensive alternative... and the fastest.

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 16, 2004 3:27:00 PM

Did Autocad realease a version just for HT? If so you could just do a P4 with HT. That Extreme edition has 2mb of cache with HT but that chip cost more than 2 3.2 zeons. Im leaning more toward a dual zeon system than the P4 extreme edition system. A 3.2ghz p4 chip should do fine either way.


For me I would not choose and Intel and would get a dual Opteron sytem. AMD chips have an advantage with 3d processing over intel but they are pricey. Plus opterons can do 64bit and 32bit apps.

Barton 2500+ @ 2200mhz (10x220 vcore @ 1.8)
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro(420/720)
January 16, 2004 3:41:04 PM

Quote:
True, indeed. The only thing is that a 248 is not that cheap... it's some $1000, while Xeon 1MB is around $700... So, for a dual system, there'll probably be at least $600 price difference, I guess...


But the time you will save, will make save a lot more than 600$, I think it's worth it. It's not a 2-3% difference, it's more than 15%. It means you can do 6 days of processing in 5 days... Think about that!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by TheRod on 01/16/04 12:42 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 16, 2004 6:05:23 PM

true. And not to mention that we are talking about high-end workstation where money isn´t a problem. Money isn´t the more important thing. The more important thing is perfomance. But if money would be a problem, there is Opteron 246, same price than Xeon 3,06 1MB L3, and of course Opteron 246 outperforms Xeon 3.06 1MB L3 too (in this case about 10-12%).
January 16, 2004 10:04:33 PM

Quote:
Money isn´t the more important thing. The more important thing is perfomance.

I work with workstations, and it's nothing like that. If price wasn't an issue, we'd all be using quad-itanium-2 systems with 64GB memory for workstation! These will kill any opteron you throw at it, provided you compile your code with Intel compilers...

So price does matter, for any niche.

But, point well taken: the 246 is probably the most balanced purchase. Buying the 248 is probably just a waste of money for that extra percentage in performance....

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 16, 2004 10:20:54 PM

ummmm 600 € or $600 aren´t a problem (not at least a great issue) in high-end workstations. 60.000 € or $60.000 or 30.000 are a problem not only in high-end workstations but in our life too lol ;) 

But you are correct, buy top model microprocesors (Opteron 248, Xeon 3.2, A64 FX or Opty 148, P4 EE, A64 3400+, P4C 3.2 etc) is a waste of money. That is clear. Extra price isn´t balanced with extra perfomance of these chips.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by eugeneMC on 01/16/04 07:38 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 16, 2004 11:02:39 PM

Quote:
600 € or $600 aren´t a problem (not at least a great issue) in high-end workstations.

That has to be determined on an each-case basis, not as a general guideline... But I get your point, of course. :smile: But not everyone needs a "high-end" workstation, it's very common for people to need an entry- to mid-level workstation!

It's just that, sometimes, you have to manage a way to get a workstation with a few thousand dollars, and not more... It depends on your needs. If I lived in the USA, this would be easier, but workstation hardware gets so overtaxed when imported that it's rare to get state-of-art stuff at all!

Just so you feel exactly how frustrating this is, one guy I used to work with for the past year got insanely proud when, some five or four months ago, he purchased (with faculty money) two dual MP 2000+ on those nasty AMD760 chipsets (the older generation, mind you)... This was a "budget minded" decision for him... I didn't have the guts to tell him that that was not really a great choice of his!... :frown:

It's frustrating, for sure... Some ads around here sell 2000+, or 1.8A/2.0A/2.2A P4s as if they were processors that could "handle all workload you could imagine"... This actually physically hurts me! I'm offended by these ads... At least the P4Cs changed some of this, and some ads with 3.0Ghz P4 now exist around here... even if they're hard to find. But people here are so blatantly stupid that there was this pool on which processor was better - a 3000+ or a 3.0C or 3.2C - and the pool went like 70-80% towards AMD!!!

Sometimes, I'm just angry with the stupidity of people with all things regarding hardware. :mad:  ...

Not the case of any of you guys here, of course! You're all - even the worst of you, hehe - just fine people!

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 18, 2004 12:21:22 AM

P4 Xeon processors have always had Hyperthreading enabled right since the word go. If you don't intend to use 2 processors then there is no point to buy the Xeon. The reason you pay $1500 more for a dual Xeon workstation is the cost of the extra processor and the dual board/chipset. You'll have to try 'em out and see if you think the $1500 extra for a dual workstation is work the cash.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.html?member=114979" target="_new">My PCs</A> :cool:
January 18, 2004 2:58:46 AM

Xeon for work. P4 high ghz with HT for home use.
Depends on how hardcore you're gonna get. If it's for work do it right.. and get xeon.
Unless you don't really have to be that price conscious, go opteron.
I'm not a fanboy.. for both processors are great for certain things.

Abit nf7-s
barton2500+ 174x 11(and climbing)
mushkin lvl 2
radeon 9800pro
thermalright900a/w volcano7+ ontop moddified.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Johanthegnarler on 01/18/04 00:06 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 18, 2004 5:06:50 AM

dont go for AMD when building a server , they maybe 10% faster and cheaper, but not as reliable as geniune Intel processors. reliability, and dependability is more important than performance in the server workstation market.

INTEL=QUALITY

-------
:evil:  <b><font color=red>K</font color=red></b>anavit's Aquamark3 rig----><A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940..." target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940...;/A> <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Kanavit on 01/18/04 02:10 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 18, 2004 5:27:35 AM

Coop, have at it.

I don't agree with this type of post any more than you do. I'm not an 'Intel lover' as you so eloquently put it. My next system could very well have an AMD processor in it... but since that is likely still more than a year away, I really couldn't say right now.

AMD's chips are just as reliable as Intel's. It's bullshit like this floating around that's kept AMD out of the market for so long... that and crappy chipsets. Of course, since AMD doesn't make their own chipsets, we can't really blame them for VIA's blunders. Then again we could just as easily say that because AMD didn't have it's own chipset for it's own processor is the reason most people were stuck with VIA chipsets...

AMD should follow Intel's example: make rock-solid chipsets to sell with your CPUs. That way, their reputation wouldn't hang on another company. VIA has made them look bad in the past.

However, AMD's CPUs are just as reliable as Intel's. There's no difference in quality; other than what is perceived.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
January 18, 2004 6:27:36 AM

Lol. That's the best thing i've heard all day.
Next thing you're going to tell me that windows is more reliable than linux when it comes to servers.
You must be one of those A+ certified kids that runs servers for a small company.
By the way i love intel.. but i also have the mind to realize AMD isn't a generic secondary choice. I just recently bought this rig in my sig, i'm an inteliot.

Abit nf7-s
barton2500+ 174x 11(and climbing)
mushkin lvl 2
radeon 9800pro
thermalright900a/w volcano7+ ontop moddified.
January 18, 2004 12:00:40 PM

Kanavit = troll

It's simple.
January 18, 2004 1:35:24 PM

It's simple. Intel knows they have name brand recognition and trust from consumers, so it's not so important to beat Opteron in all benchmarks. They can also charge more too, because they are geniune intel processors, not imposters. And they use real mhz to gain performance, not magical PR numbers. People are always be willing to invest in Intel. Plus, Intel service and warranty is the best in the industry. Thats why they own 85% of the desktop market and AMD is only 15%. Really who really gives a hoot about gaming benchmarks!! THe A64 only beats the P4 by 10-15fps, like anyone can really tell. I think it's more noticeable to see 3.2ghz (P4) difference to the (A64) 2ghz.

-------
:evil:  <b><font color=red>K</font color=red></b>anavit's Aquamark3 rig----><A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940..." target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940...;/A>
January 18, 2004 1:57:33 PM

I have to agree with Kanavit, Intel has a reputation of being very relyable, AMD does not. Even though things seemed to have changed for AMD they really havent.

Its somewhat about their image that AMD just isnt trying hard enough to shake off. They need to clean slate the whole deal and come off as a company you can rely on. That their technology will last and a company they can trust.

Just because users here trust AMD even when VIA was big with them *shutters* doesnt mean a great majority of corporate america will. These companies are dropping millions down on hardware at once if there is the slightest thought that the equipment isnt up to standard they dont buy. AMD still has the shadow of doubt following them.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 18, 2004 2:16:05 PM

Well you are allowed to have your opinion but frankly i dont agree with you. Stability problems with AMD happened with the intriduction of the first K7 cores...(and to some extent the K6-2 series, simply because of lagging chipset support). But as the platform matured and AMD won some reputation with the K7, chipset quality increased.

If you compare the K8 laucnch and the K7 launch you will notice that this time AMD has a whole lot better support, and as of now no seriopus issues with the VIA chipset or AMD chipset has been spotted, as time goes on the chiopset and processor will mature even futher.

AMD instability is a thing of the past and as we know prejudice isn't a good thing.

Kanavit:
AMD impostors, Intel the GENUINE manfacturer, bah. It's people like you that skew the debate in these forums by posting things you can't back up with evidence. Chipset stability on AMD platform has been in an uphill advance for the past 4-5 years.

Taitertot:
Sure Corporate America, but there are other things than America and as far as i know, AMD has a much better marketshare i Europe. (Heck, even one(two by 2006) their fabs are placed in Dresden-Germany).
If AMD has such a bad marketing why don't you tell us what they should do to convince Intel-fanatics like you to even CONSIDER AMD as an option?
January 18, 2004 2:38:09 PM

Kanavit is a very well known troll in a lot of forums. He doesn´t know what he is talking about. What Kanavit says = nothing. That's all. No more comments.
January 18, 2004 2:40:51 PM

Quote:
I think it's more noticeable to see 3.2ghz (P4) difference to the (A64) 2ghz.

Ever heard of Intel's Pentium M ?
January 18, 2004 3:09:19 PM

I never said anything about their stability or anything that had to do with their CPU's you AMD guys always assume when we say AMD isn’t a great company it must be AMD doesn’t have good CPU's, but whatever right.

I stated corporate America doesn’t seem the image they see with Intel. Take for instance the i820 issue, where the mobo manufactures didn’t follow the specs correctly on the SD version for the chipset. Intel replaced all (who ever wanted them replaced) those motherboard and gave them 128mb RD too boot. That’s what I am talking about Intel much like very large corporations always go that extra mile to ensure their customers are very happy with their product.

That’s all I meant but as I said above AMD users always pick apart what is said and twist it so that it looks good to them. Which isn’t the case here all I was stating was AMD as a corporation isn’t viewed well. They are 2 billion+ in debt they have been non profitable for just about 2 years maybe more. These things way heavy when certain segments decide that they are going to purchase a large amount of hardware. They want no doubt in their purchase they don’t overly care too much about performance either. They want to buy it run it and never worry about it period.

Well since you obviously know the market share in other continents you should let us all see these magic numbers. Also the German Fab deal is a push for Germany to get back into the global technology race. They are deep discounting AMD fabs to ensure they can keep competitive in the global market.

Intel’s marketing doesn’t affect my purchase decisions either. I am aware of the pros and cons of each manufactures product. It depends on my needs when I drop the cash for hardware.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 18, 2004 4:54:54 PM

sure... AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, and for this reason IBM and Sun (two of the four greatest server makers) are building Opteron servers and Opteron clusters.

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, Cray (one of the greatest supercomputers maker company) is developing a product line of supercomputers named Red Storm: clusters with thousands of Opteron.

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, the U.S. Department of Energy, has ordered to Cray one of this Red Storm supercomputers with 10,000 Opteron 246, and it is believed that when this Red Storm is finished this 2004 year, it could outpace the world's fastest supercomputer, Japan's NEC Earth Simulator:

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5097398.html

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, Los Alamos National Laboratory has ordered clusters Opteron supercomputers, too:

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-5063722.html?tag=nl

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, Japan's National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology has ordered IBM Opteron supercomputers clusters, too:

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-5057691.html?tag=nl

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, another of the greatest supercomputer makers, Chinese Dawning Information Industry, is making supercomputer Opteron named Dawning 400A, and when the 4000A is ready for delivery this June it will be the third world's fastest supercomputers:

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-5055317.html?tag=nl

And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well, a lot of US, European, Asian Universities are ordering Opteron clusters, and not to mention servers builders as Polywell, Newisys etc selling a lot of Opteron servers. And Opteron is in the market only nine months ago.

These are only some examples of what happens today with AMD corporation that isn’t viewed well, and his Opteron chips.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by eugeneMC on 01/18/04 02:00 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 18, 2004 5:15:40 PM

IBM is a once top dog OEM Dell now rules them. SUN was once an influential company now they do networking as their staple product and try to push the joke known as Java, so the two of them don’t surprise me.

Cray is a dead company IMO they haven’t made any revolutionary advancements to the industry for a very very long time. I also believe its around 18k cpu cluster since you generalized how many were being used.

The Operton is a very powerful CPU no one here that’s sane will deny that. The purchase of this supercomputer cluster is momentous in the history of AMD. But don’t confuse image of a company with the power of their product. The US government also has a responsibility to issue contracts to as many American companies to balance the load. Which has nothing to do with their image as a company but the fact they make a extremely powerful CPU I personally lean more towards they just came up on the contract list of companies to be dealt with since a Itanium 2 cluster would be significantly more powerful.

Also I highly doubt that the Red Storm cluster will touch the Earth simulators Tflops.

With the other clusters it comes down to the fact that AMD delivered first and it meets their fiscal boundaries. But do not confuse the image of AMD getting these deals its the fact they have a very powerful CPU and they have very reliable partners executing these massive projects for them.

Also on a final note I’m going to stress again that none of this has to do with AMD's image since I clearly stated certain segments choose on this image. It’s because they built a very powerful CPU. But as I said before AMD guys always twist things for some damned reason to make it look like we said oh their CPU sucks when in fact all we said was AMD corporation sucks.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 18, 2004 6:54:29 PM

wahhhjajaja some of these days you discover the gunpowder!! What you want guy, live in your world.

Have a nice day.
January 18, 2004 7:06:10 PM

Gun powder... oh I get it you are attempting to make a joke in implying I live some sort of sheltered life or I haven’t grasped certain ideas you are trying to portray.

Ha-ha I find it funny but not as funny as you no rebuttal to my statements which leads me to believe you weren’t up for the debate, pity I do enjoy a good debate.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 18, 2004 8:11:58 PM

U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) Simulation Center (SC)

http://www.sc.army.mil/text/newst.html


<i>The SC has purchased a 256 processor AMD Opteron cluster from Atipa Technologies Incorporated

- The cluster will have 246 AMD Opteron (2.0GHz) 64-bit processors for processing compute intensive user jobs.

- Each processor will have access to 1GB of memory.

- There will be four I/O nodes that will control access to 11TB of disk storage through the PolyServe filesystem. PolyServe Matrix Server is a cluster file system (CFS) that binds a cluster of servers into a highly flexible, centrally managed server farm. With the implementation of this filesystem, users should be able to achieve a theoretical data transfer rate of nearly 800MB/sec.

- The cluster will be equipped with Myrinet 2000 - a very high speed interconnect (>400MB/sec) for interprocess communication. For "tightly coupled" distributed computations, the interconnect will provide high-data-rate and low-latency communication between host processes.

- The cluster will have the Portland Group Compilers and MPI

- Users will be able to submit jobs via Platform Computing's Load Sharing Facility (LSF) batch scheduler.

- The AMD Opteron is compatible with the Intel 32-bit mode allowing both 32-bit and 64-bit jobs to run simultaneously on the system.

Expected delivery and integration of the cluster is in December 2003. Volunteer pioneer users will exercise the system for approximately one month, The system should be available to the general user community (Defense Research and Engineering Network) by February 2004. Within this period, the SC will move to its new home. So, there will be disruptions during move events.</i>



Your blablablabla statements are extremely easy to rebuttal, simply with cascade of real informations like all these ;-)
January 18, 2004 8:51:52 PM

Quote:
And because AMD is a corporation isn’t viewed well,

Eugene, you keep saying that and stating other things that inspire respect for AMD's work, but...

Have you considered that, aparently, neither tailortot nor anyone else said anything regarding their personal beliefs here? We're sure that AMD deserves respect for building a powerful processor, (tailortot said that himself), but many people out there will still tell you that <i>intel is more trustworthy than AMD</i>, and they're not reading your rants here. We're not saying these people are right. So, take it easy... We're not what should be your target, sorry. I understand how you feel, anyway! :smile:

But...

Unfortunately, I do agree that you should explain yourself and your positions a bit better than just saying... "man, you live in your own world"... Erm, sorry.

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 18, 2004 10:51:09 PM

Mephistopheles, I think it is a waste of time to write a book with my statements and positions, they would be only another opinion of another person. Nothing more.

I think all this information and links I'm giving about this issue speaks by itself, and it is very clear.

Many people out there will still tell you that intel is more trustworthy than AMD? well, it is their problem. If they are anchored in the past, I repeat, it is their problem. Obviously all these scientific corporations, governmental corporations, Universities etc etc with critical and extremely important activities don´t think this, it´s obvious, when they confide in AMD technology for their critical activities. That's all.

All other is blablabla of people that demonstrate that they don´t know nothing about this issue, about the position that AMD is obtaining day after day in the high-end corporate market. It´s a large road, but AMD is walking it, with their current chips, K8. That's irrefutable :-)
January 19, 2004 6:15:55 AM

Quote:
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it's more noticeable to see 3.2ghz (P4) difference to the (A64) 2ghz.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ever heard of Intel's Pentium M ?

Yes, the banias processor with stock ops technology, and 1mb L2 cache, has more IPC than PIII, and but shorter pipeline than P4. I call it the secret weapon, i don't expent Centrino to reach desktops though it will remain laptop since heating is a big issue in mobile platform.

-------
:evil:  <b><font color=red>K</font color=red></b>anavit's Aquamark3 rig----><A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940..." target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=181795940...;/A>
January 19, 2004 7:17:12 AM

Again a powerful partner is putting it all together and again AMD made a very powerful CPU. This has nothing to do with AMD's image to the market. But I should have been clearer with it in stating with these wins AMD will get more and more recognition for their products and it will eventually bring over to the image improvement.

But as I stated before AMD needs to stop catering to the enthusiast groups that don’t mean jack to the pocket book and drive home that they are a company that doesn’t need fuzzy hertz to win that they don’t need a AMD ME campaign or a pointless picture of a guy that doesn’t know jack about computers but looks good in the lighting they are using.

They need to come out strong and say hey we aren’t an Intel clone we aren’t the little guy you think we are. We are AMD we are spearheading the future of this industry come for the ride type deal.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 19, 2004 9:52:31 AM

Quote:
Mephistopheles, I think it is a waste of time to write a book with my statements and positions, they would be only another opinion of another person. Nothing more.

I think all this information and links I'm giving about this issue speaks by itself, and it is very clear.

Let me just remind you that you said tailortot lived in his own world <i>before</i> posting that link on the US Department of Energy. What I'm saying is that you should try to be more patient... That's all.

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 19, 2004 9:59:21 AM

Quote:
They need to come out strong and say hey we aren’t an Intel clone we aren’t the little guy you think we are. We are AMD we are spearheading the future of this industry come for the ride type deal.

Correct... The problem with AMD is not technical right now. The problem with AMD is that they do lousy marketing (remember that AMD ad in which some idiot claimed he could beat someone else in a network game "because of FPS"? That is a horrible example of marketing.

The other thing is that AMD has done a bit of mismanagement in this transition. In March, they will have introduced 3 different sockets for desktops over a period of 6 months. Plus, their roadmaps don't seem that clear... Intel keeps information minimal, so as to avoid confusion. And they keep things straightforward...

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 19, 2004 10:10:09 AM

Grow a brian Mephistopheles. It depends on the software and hardware that make which cpu faster. It easy for Intel or Amd to make them self faster. If you so bloody Blind dont Post here.
January 19, 2004 10:13:37 AM

Quote:
It depends on the software and hardware that make which cpu faster.

Excuse me, but I have no idea as to what you're talking about. Did I, in any of my posts in this thread, mention performance?... I'm sincerely lost.

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 19, 2004 10:44:20 AM

I was aware of the current listings of AMD supercomputers, google is a wonderful tool. Buddy still hasn’t come across that AMD is reliable and trustworthy as a company yet. But he says they are and constantly posts links to other sites showing off their supercomputers which still doesn’t say anything about their corporate image as a reliable business partner.

Since last I checked, when you buy a Dell you don’t phone Intel up when the CPU dies you phone Dell, it’s the same with these super computers. Also it comes down to a issue of knowledge(probably a bad example) people don’t buy Dells because they have Intel Inside they buy them because Dell has built a image of a reliable partner which has been helped along with Intel who is also a reliable partner. Hopefully you are starting to follow my logic on this current discussion?

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 19, 2004 1:53:52 PM

Well if America decided to use AMD Opterons to power their missile defence system i SURE hope they are reliable...Why would the states buy AMD processors if the company itselft wasn't reliable and trustworthy?
January 19, 2004 1:53:53 PM

Well if America decided to use AMD Opterons to power their missile defence system i SURE hope they are reliable...Why would the states buy AMD processors if the company itselft wasn't reliable and trustworthy?
January 19, 2004 2:32:01 PM

Quote:
Let me just remind you that you said tailortot lived in his own world before posting that link on the US Department of Energy.

No Mephistopheles. I said tailortot lived in his own world <i>after</i> posting that link on the US Department of Energy (with the others) and after tailortot replied to that first post with more useless and absurb blablablabla.

After this, I give the link of US Army, bah... he continues with his blablabla and living in his own world.

tailortot, sincerely, you have a problem, I wish you resolves it ;-).

Regards.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by eugeneMC on 01/19/04 11:33 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 19, 2004 3:07:16 PM

Oh well... you're right, you did post some of your links before doing that, sorry. Ahh... It was the US Army that you quoted later... anyway, whatever, this is too pointless!! I understand what you mean and am sorry for the confusion; I was just trying to bring some peace of mind here... And avoid discussion. :smile: I hope AMD can level its playing ground with Intel, so we get better processors. That's all... It looks as if they are on the right track!

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 01/19/04 01:09 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2004 3:40:16 PM

Been away for a few months and nothing has changed.. what a surprise :(  Someone asks a real question about a real dilemma, and gets worthless responses from clueless kids that only care about 3Dmark scores and have never even seen a server room or touched a workstation, and then it degenerates into yet another tiresome "intel versus AMD" trollfest.

Everyone also seems to miss you are buying HP, and unless something major has changed over the last few months, HP is not offering Opteron workstations, making all this a total non issue. Sure opteron performs (very) well on CAD, but unless you can persuade HP to sell you one, its not likely to impact you at all.

Here is my advice to you: do your own research, look for benchmarks that come as close to your working environment as possible, preferably from people knowledgeable about CAD, and use those. Don't ask these kind of questions in this forum anymore, as you're not likely to get much wiser unfortunately... Keep in mind this forum is largely populated by fragging teens (good to get info from when you're building a gaming rig), not much use though if you need info on a server or workstation.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
January 19, 2004 3:59:26 PM

Quote:
Been away for a few months and nothing has changed.. what a surprise :(  Someone asks a real question about a real dilemma, and gets worthless responses from clueless kids that only care about 3Dmark scores and have never even seen a server room or touched a workstation, and then it degenerates into yet another tiresome "intel versus AMD" trollfest.

I agree with you there. I have used workstations and servers, and I have to admire just how pointless this has become. My posts here actually didn't help much, and I'm sorry for that. I was trying to calm these people down by making them see that they mean the same things with different words, but... couldn't get to it.

As for waervin, sorry 'bout the absence of help...

My advice would be to get a full-blown Xeon setup. It's a good processor, and does great in CAD and 3d models. Maybe not as great as Opteron in some apps, but it'll do really fine and is coming from HP, a very respectable company.

Going with the 3.2Ghz P4 is a great choice too, depending on how much those extra $1500 mean to you. That's up to you to decide... But generally, dual Xeons are more responsive (think of four logical CPUs; 2 xeons with HT...) and more powerful and expensive.

As for Opteron, well, you'd have to get it from somewhere else. Not HP, as bbaeyens pointed out. If you wanted to go that route. It's a good one, from what I've heard. I've never seen an Opteron personally. I've seen Xeons and P4s, though. And Xeons are very respectable... bbaeyens is right in pointing out that you should to research pertaining to the exact software - or closest match thereof - that you'll use. Which program will you use, BTW?

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
January 19, 2004 4:11:48 PM

LoL said nothing about the CPUs in fact I’m impressed by them. I stated that their image as a company isn’t up to par. You want to argue the point so be it, but AMD made a hell of a processor I commend them for that I also commend them for the defense department contract. But it wasn’t their contract to win it was Atipa Technologies Inc. not AMD’s the fact they got the contract was because of their bid for the contract was cheaper. That’s how all bids for contract work.

But like I said before you guys keep twisting it to what you want to see, when in fact I have nothing bad to say about the Opteron/A64 but I do about AMD corp. plain and simple.

Also no where did I state that I myself didn’t trust AMD corp. or their product base, I stated what a good majority of corporate America thinks not what the defense department, the department of energy, FBI on any University or College thinks. All I know for certain is that AMD hasn’t penetrated that high price point market well enough because of their image. So stop posting government contracts since they purchase on different criteria, mostly cost.

-taitertot

If this post has attitude, seems to be overly aggressive, rude, distasteful to 99% of the users here, and shows a zealous defense of Intel... It’s probably Spud.
January 19, 2004 8:56:51 PM

<b>AMD64 Technology Selected By DaimlerChrysler for Mission-Critical Computing Applications</b>

—AMD Opteron™ Processor-based Servers Tabbed for Crash Simulation Applications—

Sunnyvale, CA -- January 19, 2004 --AMD (NYSE:AMD) today announced that <b>DaimlerChrysler AG has implemented its new AMD Opteron™ processor-based cluster in the Mercedes-Benz Technology Center (MTC) in Germany.</b> Based on AMD64 technology, the new cluster is the second AMD processor-based cluster installed by DaimlerChrysler in the last three years.

<b>The new cluster will utilize several hundred AMD Opteron processors and will be used in one of the most important testing areas for DaimlerChrysler: the crash-simulation division, where performance, stability and software compatibility are crucial elements.</b>

<b>“The successful results we obtained with our previous AMD processor-based cluster in shortening our product development processes and in running compute-intensive simulations drove us to evaluate the new AMD64 technology platform,” said Dr. Johannes Luginsland, manager IT infrastructure for safety and comfort simulation, DaimlerChrysler. “After a deep analysis we came to the conclusion that AMD64 technology is the only solution that can offer us the needed performance for such mission–critical applications like car safety, and a smooth migration to 64-bit technology while retaining software compatibility and protecting our corporate investments.”</b>

<b>DaimlerChrysler’s new AMD Opteron processor-based cluster will be used to run crash simulations for all upcoming Mercedes-Benz cars and will be one of the largest high-performance Linux clusters in the German automotive industry.</b>

“DaimlerChrysler’s decision to employ the AMD Opteron processor in its new cluster is further confirmation that AMD64 technology meets the needs of large enterprises today,” said Giuliano Meroni, group vice president, European Sales and Worldwide Distribution, AMD. “The AMD Opteron processor enables DaimlerChrysler to preserve its investments in sophisticated and customized 32-bit software while increasing overall performance and having the ability to migrate to 64-bit applications at their pace as they become available.”

<b>The latest win with DaimlerChrysler is one of many of the growing number of enterprise-class customers that are moving to AMD64 technology based servers worldwide for their mission-critical data and applications.</b>


http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...


Now my stimate taitertot, will say... baaah it's AMD page.. LOL

Well, continue living in your own world ;-)


PS: ummmm talking about HP:

<b>HP hints broadly at Opteron servers</b>

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13709

Let's wait what happens... :-)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by eugeneMC on 01/19/04 06:02 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
!