Intel "Harpertown" Xeon vs. AMD "Barcelona" Opteron
by Jason Clark & Ross Whitehead on September 18, 2007 5:00 PM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
Conclusion
Finally we had an opportunity to pit two quad-core parts from the CPU giants against each other and see who has the better part. The question is, what makes a better processor? Is it how quickly it can accomplish a given workload? Is it how much performance it offers over how much it costs? Is it how much performance it offers over how much power it consumes? The answer is more than likely all of the above in some proportion.
Performance
Intel has made some successful changes to the quad-core Xeon that have helped it achieve as much as a 56% lead in performance over the 2.0GHz Barcelona part. Of course this is mostly due to the fact that the Harpertown part has a 1GHz clock speed advantage, and the various micro-architecture tweaks surely help fill in the rest. It's clear that AMD has potential with Barcelona, and it will be extremely interesting to see where they end up as clock-speed ramps. With 2.5GHz parts due out before the end of the year, the difference between AMD and Intel may not be all that great - barring any other announcements, of course.
Performance / Watt
AMD has always been extremely strong in performance/watt, especially at the lower load levels and even more so at idle. Barcelona uses the least amount of watts at idle and manages to come close to the new Harpertown parts on AS3AP; however, Intel due to its 1GHz clock advantage takes the lead on every other benchmark, particularly at higher loads. Again, AMD needs to ramp clock speed in order to compete with Intel, and it looks like that will happen over the next few months. The question is, will it come soon enough to start winning back some market-share?
Price
While Barcelona is still difficult to get ahold of, the expected price of the Opteron 2350 should be around $400. Harpertown is brand new, so we're not yet able to find any prices in the retail market, but the expected price for the E5472 will be around $1000 when the 1600FSB parts launch. The new Harpertown E5430 (2.66GHz) is expected to cost close to $450 while the E5420 (2.33GHz) will cost closer to $320. FB-DIMMs carry a slight price premium over registered DDR2-667 ECC memory, but these days RAM prices are pretty much comparable. The bottom line is that for 2S systems, it appears that AMD may have a small pricing advantage at the low-end (at least until any Intel price cuts occur). However, considering the overall cost of a well equipped 2S server/workstation, saving a few hundred dollars for equivalent performance may not be enough to sway purchasing decisions.
Two weeks ago, AMD's standing in the IT world was definitely in question. Barcelona may not be the knockout punch that many were hoping for, but it definitely makes them far more competitive. The fact that Barcelona is a drop-in replacement for existing Socket-F systems certainly doesn't hurt, although we could say the same thing about Harpertown and existing Intel Core systems. There is of course one area where AMD still does have an advantage: 4-way and higher server configurations, where their Direct Connect topology has some distinct advantages that may not be overcome for quite some time. All we need now is to see how fast AMD can ramp up production and availability of Barcelona, and how far they are able to push clock speeds. It will still be difficult for them to gain market share, but at least they should be able to stop the bleeding and hopefully return to profitability.
Update: For those that are looking for more details and wondering why certain other chips aren't included, at the time testing was conducted we did not have any of the faster 2.5GHz Barcelona chips (or the slower Harpertowns). That situation has been remedied in terms of AMD's CPUs, and we will have some update articles looking at how the faster Barcelona compares with other processors. Stay tuned....
Finally we had an opportunity to pit two quad-core parts from the CPU giants against each other and see who has the better part. The question is, what makes a better processor? Is it how quickly it can accomplish a given workload? Is it how much performance it offers over how much it costs? Is it how much performance it offers over how much power it consumes? The answer is more than likely all of the above in some proportion.
Performance
Intel has made some successful changes to the quad-core Xeon that have helped it achieve as much as a 56% lead in performance over the 2.0GHz Barcelona part. Of course this is mostly due to the fact that the Harpertown part has a 1GHz clock speed advantage, and the various micro-architecture tweaks surely help fill in the rest. It's clear that AMD has potential with Barcelona, and it will be extremely interesting to see where they end up as clock-speed ramps. With 2.5GHz parts due out before the end of the year, the difference between AMD and Intel may not be all that great - barring any other announcements, of course.
Performance / Watt
AMD has always been extremely strong in performance/watt, especially at the lower load levels and even more so at idle. Barcelona uses the least amount of watts at idle and manages to come close to the new Harpertown parts on AS3AP; however, Intel due to its 1GHz clock advantage takes the lead on every other benchmark, particularly at higher loads. Again, AMD needs to ramp clock speed in order to compete with Intel, and it looks like that will happen over the next few months. The question is, will it come soon enough to start winning back some market-share?
Price
While Barcelona is still difficult to get ahold of, the expected price of the Opteron 2350 should be around $400. Harpertown is brand new, so we're not yet able to find any prices in the retail market, but the expected price for the E5472 will be around $1000 when the 1600FSB parts launch. The new Harpertown E5430 (2.66GHz) is expected to cost close to $450 while the E5420 (2.33GHz) will cost closer to $320. FB-DIMMs carry a slight price premium over registered DDR2-667 ECC memory, but these days RAM prices are pretty much comparable. The bottom line is that for 2S systems, it appears that AMD may have a small pricing advantage at the low-end (at least until any Intel price cuts occur). However, considering the overall cost of a well equipped 2S server/workstation, saving a few hundred dollars for equivalent performance may not be enough to sway purchasing decisions.
Two weeks ago, AMD's standing in the IT world was definitely in question. Barcelona may not be the knockout punch that many were hoping for, but it definitely makes them far more competitive. The fact that Barcelona is a drop-in replacement for existing Socket-F systems certainly doesn't hurt, although we could say the same thing about Harpertown and existing Intel Core systems. There is of course one area where AMD still does have an advantage: 4-way and higher server configurations, where their Direct Connect topology has some distinct advantages that may not be overcome for quite some time. All we need now is to see how fast AMD can ramp up production and availability of Barcelona, and how far they are able to push clock speeds. It will still be difficult for them to gain market share, but at least they should be able to stop the bleeding and hopefully return to profitability.
Update: For those that are looking for more details and wondering why certain other chips aren't included, at the time testing was conducted we did not have any of the faster 2.5GHz Barcelona chips (or the slower Harpertowns). That situation has been remedied in terms of AMD's CPUs, and we will have some update articles looking at how the faster Barcelona compares with other processors. Stay tuned....
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
MrKaz - Thursday, September 20, 2007 - link
You bring very valid points! And thanks to the originator of this discussion!But let me spice things a little.
I think you and Anandtech are wrong!
Correct testing would be loading ALL THE MEMORY BANKS WITH RAM!!!
That would be more realistic scenario.
I see Intel praising the technology edge of FBDIMM by allowing to have more RAM on the system, then lets load the Intel system with the maximum RAM they can handle.
Otherwise seams a little biased test.
Showing how Intel systems:
-are energy efficient = use less RAM on them and add more to the AMD system
-can handle much more RAM than AMD = Show how Intel system have lots of memory banks
flyck - Thursday, September 20, 2007 - link
although you are correct when you say there are small errors in the setup, i cant agree with the part about being paid by intel todo...This is an assault which they cannot defend themselves against.
Either way this review would be much more interesting when a 2.5GHz release and low power barcelonas would be available. But that is dependent on AMD itself.
Viditor - Thursday, September 20, 2007 - link
As to that, the low power Barcelonas are available...NewEgg has them in stock already.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">NewEgg
flyck - Thursday, September 20, 2007 - link
most hardware site rely on hardware that has been given to them for testpurposes. They wont buy them.Justin Case - Thursday, September 20, 2007 - link
Which is probably one of the reasons why CPUs in some reviews overclock so well, and the ones you buy from retail overclock so poorly.I don't trust any review where the item was supplied by the manufacturer; chances are they cherry-picked the best one they had, to get the best possible review. If the sites can't afford to buy the items they're reviewing, they should simply strike a deal with a retailer, where they get to test the stuff (and return it) in exchange for a sponsored link or something. That way the chances of getting an above-average (or below-average) part are the same as for anyone else.
Justin Case - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
In other words, what you're saying that the Opteron did not have more RAM than the Xeon, so it did not get any benefit from the different memory configuration.Well, that's the "pro-AMD" conspiracy put to rest, no doubt. Thanks.
But you still have 8 DDR2 DIMMs on the Opteron versus 4 FB-DIMMs on the Xeon. As pointed out above, using the same configuration would either reduce the Barcelona system's power consumption (by about 18 watts, if both used 4 DIMMs) or increase the Harpertown system's consumption (by about 40 watts, if both used 8 DIMMs).
In the latter case (which is the likely scenario on a server under high loads - fill it with as much RAM as possible), that would put the Xeon's "performance per watt" below that of the Barcelona system in most of your tests.
And there's still the mystery of why a system that dissipates less heat needs more than twice as many fans. Or was there also a typo on the number of fans in each system? Maybe the number of fans is different but the total number of fan blades is the same, so that's alright? :)
Wirmish - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
The problem is not the number of GB, it's the number of DIMMs.Do you try to convince us that one 8GB DIMM use the same power as eight 1GB DIMMs ?
This is just plain stupid.
Wirmish - Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - link
Same question...AMD..: 8 DIMMs (16 GB) + 7 fans
INTEL: 4 DIMMs (8 GB) + 3 fans
http://www.interfacebus.com/Memory_Module_DDR2_FB_...">LINK
With 8 FBDIMMs the Xeon may consume ~42 watts more !
A standard fan may consume anywhere from 1.6 to 6.0 watts.
Try to use only 4 fans (1 middle-front, 1 top-rear, 2 CPU) with the AMD system.
It will work perfectly and you will save ~15 watts.
1. Add 4 FBDIMM in the Xeon system.
2. Remove three 3.5" fans in the AMD system.
3. Rebench.
4. Update your power consumption and performance/watt graphs.
5. Thank you very much.
Proteusza - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
okay I also think its fishy but I'm playing devils advocate here.if you had to run a netburst server, part of your power goes to cooling, thats part of your total energy requirement. if the AMD system requires more cooling, for whatever reason (no matter how strange that may seem), then like it or not its a part of your server and energy expense.
As for the differing amount of ram, that makes no sense at all. Why halve the amount of memory on the Intel system?
Justin Case - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
Maybe AMD uses inferior knock-off photons, so despite dissipating less heat, it needs more cooling. ;)