|
-
Dual core or Quad core
If you had to choose running Oracle on a single quad core processor or two dual core processors, which would you choose, and why?
Buying new servers and the marketing folks say the quad core has faster stage 2 cache ... any insight would be extremely helpful, we don't get to replace servers very often.
Best regards,
Ken
-
no obvious differences, other factors have way more influence
-
 Marketing folks?
And you beleive the Marketing folks? Their suggestions are based on maximizing their commissions.
Take care. 
"The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it." --Chinese Proverb
-
I think 2 dual cores is better than quad core, that's what at least we got in one of our cpu benchmarking test.
-
IMHO, databases are usually capable of doing operations in parallel, therefore more cores are better. But the usefulness of additional cores will depend on how busy the server is and how well designed the schema and front end application. Hence, you should get as many cores as you can get your employer to pay for. Two quad cores would be better than two dual cores... ; ).
Also you might want to look at virtualized servers. That should make it easier to expand your capacity in the future.
-
 Originally Posted by gandolf989
Two quad cores would be better than two dual cores
I'm in full agreement but I think the conundrum poster was facing was one quad core vs. two dual core 
Pablo (Paul) Berzukov
Author of Understanding Database Administration available at amazon and other bookstores.
Disclaimer: Advice is provided to the best of my knowledge but no implicit or explicit warranties are provided. Since the advisor explicitly encourages testing any and all suggestions on a test non-production environment advisor should not held liable or responsible for any actions taken based on the given advice.
-
i'd prefer sockets any day - which is to say IMHO 4 procecessors is better than one quad processor.
I'm stmontgo and I approve of this message
-
Originally Posted by stmontgo
i'd prefer sockets any day - which is to say IMHO 4 procecessors is better than one quad processor.
I am curious as to why 4 separate processors are always better then a single quad core processor. Even if a quad core processor has a shared cache, it still might be as fast as 4 separate processors. Wouldn't the processing power depend on how the cores work together to perform a task. So motherboard, OS and application would all shape how a question like 4 core vs. 4 processors compare...
-
Originally Posted by malay_biswal
I think 2 dual cores is better than quad core, that's what at least we got in one of our cpu benchmarking test.
Thanks for the reply, how much better was 2 dual cores over quad core?
-Ken
-
As far as i remember 2 dual core was around 10% better than 1 quad core.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|
Reply With Quote
