Bob, On Monday 23 October 2006 10:31, Robert Lewis wrote:
...
I have a dual processor AMD 64-bit 2.4 Ghz 250 Opteron with 4-GB of RAM.
I have an Intel 2.4-GHZ 32-bit machine with 1-GB of RAM.
I am running folding@home (something like seti@home) but doing protein analysis)
I watch the folding cranking results and can tell you that the Intel machine is doing computational stuff and returning results at about twice the speed of the AMD. By watch, I mean I have two terminal windows open watching both machines do there work. By the way, the AMD machine has no one on it and no work to do but this project. The Intel has multiple people on it and lots of stuff going on. The results were a complete surprise to me and somewhat shocking.
Interesting, but also lacking any real significance due to the lack of information on the FSB and memory components. I've told the story before of the performance of my theorem prover (very computationally expensive--as in 100% CPU-bound and single-threaded, apart from the JVM's garbage collection). The performance comparison between my 3.0 GHz Hyperthreading Linux box with DDR2 400 MHz RAM and my 2.0 GHz Core Duo iMac (_not_ Core 2 Duo) with DDR2 667 MHz RAM exactly reflects the difference in the speed of _the RAM_, not the CPUs. So, unless you tell us about the FSB and RAM speed on these two machines, it's impossible to really interpret your reported results.
...
Cheers, Bob
Randall Schulz