Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Why doesn't anyone here use opterons? - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Why doesn't anyone here use opterons?

2»

Comments

  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran

    I am in process of getting our first Opteron-based node, hopefully will be up within a month.

  • rm_rm_ IPv6 Advocate, Veteran
    edited April 2013

    @Damian said: E3's are intentionally crippled

    @Damian said: most E5's are crippled with SATA drives

    Exactly, Intel likes to cripple their hardware in one way or the other, AMD never does that.

  • superpilesossuperpilesos Member
    edited April 2013

    @rm_ said: Exactly, Intel likes to cripple their hardware in one way or the other, AMD never does that.

    No , they're just crippled unintentionally (amd)
    Unless their server line is much better, I have never tried it, but my old computer had the top AMD phenom quadcore and it didn't compare to intel processors released at the same time/

  • I managed to procure AMD 8234 4 cpu slot version. Thats a hexacore times four aka 24 cores. While E3 benches from 10 000-13 000 on cpubench, older Instanbul still gives a punch for 9000.

  • I'd have thought that AMD's would be much more suited to low end providers because of the good price/performance ratio

  • ChanChan Member

    @rm_ said: Exactly, Intel likes to cripple their hardware in one way or the other, AMD never does that.

    They'll probably be gone by now if they do....

  • @Damian said: since with the exception of @miTgiB, it seems like most E5's are crippled with SATA drives.

    I don't use SATA or onboard controllers, so I am not sure what you are referring to.

  • SyedSyed Member

    @miTgiB said: I don't use SATA or onboard controllers, so I am not sure what you are referring to.

    He said you're the exception. <_<

    @Damian said: with the exception of @miTgiB

  • wilbowilbo Member

    Do you have to use an AMD specific template for a container if the CPUs are Opertons?

  • @Syed said: He said you're the exception

    I saw that, I was wondering the exception to what though

  • @rm_ said: Exactly, Intel likes to cripple their hardware in one way or the other, AMD never does that.

    A difference I can think of is that Opterons use more power than Intels.. but that's the only negative I can think of.

    @superpilesos said: Unless their server line is much better

    It is.

    @miTgiB said: I don't use SATA or onboard controllers, so I am not sure what you are referring to.

    I've noticed other companies are only doing 4-drive arrays with their dual E5's... seems wasteful.

    @wilbo said: Do you have to use an AMD specific template for a container if the CPUs are Opertons?

    Do not, all of the OS software was compiled way before Xeon/Opteron, so none of it uses CPU-specific instructions

  • @Damian said: I've noticed other companies are only doing 4-drive arrays with their dual E5's... seems wasteful.

    Not us! Ha! Suck it!

  • skirtTightskirtTight Member
    edited April 2013

    @superpilesos said: I don't use them because I had a amd home computer that was slow

    Because you bought a pc with a shit cpu.

    Clearly you don't know anything.

    @superpilesos said: That wasn't a serious response.

    Many applications are still not making use of multiple cores, I'd prefer 4 of intel's fast E3 cores than 16 2ghz amd

    That's not the case with servers, applications in general.

    You really don't know what you're talking about.

  • @skirtTight said: applications in general.

    applications in general, that is, webserver, php handler, a couple of other things? Guess what, the majority of applications aren't written this way, genius.

  • @Damian said: A difference I can think of is that Opterons use more power than Intels.. but that's the only negative I can think of.

    Yep, it's why we don't use it. It uses considerably more power and is slower. The minor capital savings is not worth it.

  • OliverOliver Member, Host Rep
    edited April 2013

    But considering the amount of RAM you can pack into a system with a couple of Opterons you can have increased density and probably overall lower running costs than with an Intel based node (or multiple E3 nodes).

    Depends on usage of course but in my case I think this is likely...

  • skirtTightskirtTight Member
    edited April 2013

    @superpilesos said: applications in general, that is, webserver, php handler, a couple of other things? Guess what, the majority of applications aren't written this way, genius.

    God, you must have an iq over 190!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    GENIUS.

    phpfpm, apache/nginx, all of them give you the option to add workers (and you basically assign a process per core/thread)

  • @skirtTight said: phpfpm, apache/nginx, all of them give you the option to add workers (and you basically assign a process per core/thread)

    Congratulations, you listed three. It doesn't seem like 'applications in general' because most aren't capable of doing that

  • oic, nobody can be this stupid

    ur le reddit tr0ll xD xD

Sign In or Register to comment.