ATHLON vs XEON: number crunching
kus at free.net
Fri Jun 21 01:44:57 PDT 2002
According to Richard Walsh
> From beowulf-admin at beowulf.org Thu Jun 20 23:42:38 2002
> From: Richard Walsh <rbw at ahpcrc.org>
> To: beowulf at beowulf.org, lindahl at keyresearch.com
> Subject: Re: ATHLON vs XEON: number crunching
> "Under heavy load conditions, the latency of SDRAM deteriorates
> rapidly. RDRAM holds up quite gracefully ... under heavy load,
> where memory performance is crucial to CPU performance, RDRAM
> has far lower latency than SDRAM."
> Also, I note that both the McKinley/ZX1 from HP, EV7, and Cray SV2 will
> use RDRAM. Would you argue that this is for bandwidth reasons only?
> Perhaps this is a total versus component latency difference?
The choice of RDRAM may be was done simple because this decision
was done a lot of time ago (i.e. the time of development is
too high), when DDR was not available as good alternative to RDRAM.
Zelinsky Institute of Organic Chemistry
More information about the Beowulf