[Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3

[Lombard, David N]

From: Jim Bowen on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 8:34 AM
> On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 08:37 -0400, Joe Landman wrote:
> >
> >    We find that we are talking about "per core" to our customers
now.  I
> > explain that previously, there has been an implicit 1-to-1 mapping
> > between processor cores and chips, so that you could talk about
either
> > one and mean the other.  Now however, we are talking about per core,
as
> > things like licensing (lmgrd) aren't going to count chips or
sockets,
> > but will count cores.
> 
> Unfortunately it isn't going to be that straightforward ... some
vendors
> are going to go by sockets/chips (Microsoft, Red Hat) and others by
> cores (your example of lmgrd and I believe Oracle). Confusion will
> abound. Oh well.

I suspect the MS & RH and Macrovision(FLEXlm) & Oracle were actually
talking about different things related to *what* their licensing is
counting.

I haven't seen a lot of confusion about socket (or chip) as it refers to
a physical thing; similarly, core also appears reasonably well
understood.

The term "CPU" appears to be the problem...

-- 
dnl

My comments represent my opinions, not those of Intel Corporation.