Dual PII 350 vs Xeon 450

[bout2k]

What do you guys think?.. Dual PII 350 256 cache vs Xeon 450 1 mb cache.. Both with 256mb Ram..

Who will score better using a bench mark with 2000 pro o/s?.. A friend and I are bringing our systems tmrw to find out using winstone...

[Fubarian]

Don't even bother with the xeon - you'll NEVER use the power that it has, and besides, the mobos for those are really freakin expensive compaired to a regular slot 1.


Just make sure you run 2k/NT ok?

[Larommi]

I am curious how this will turn out. What are you gonna do with it? Server? Games? Do the Xeon's even have MMX? What operations are you trying to compare?

[Fubarian]

Yes, they have MMX but they got something in them for HUGE databases...their main useage. Unless you've got like ...oh...150+ people + web stuff, you won't need a xeon...they are pretty bad a**ed though

[Darren Wilson]

I remember a about 2 years ago supplying a used Dell Power Edge that had 4 x Xeon II 450's in it. God that was slow compared to a standard PII 450 when it ran Windows 98!!! Yes I know 98 doesn't support SMP, I installed it to see how it would perform. Must admit though it ran very nice with NT Server on it I wonder what it would run like if I had had Win2K Server at the time????

[techleet]

From what I understand, the Xeon is merely a PII/PIII with bigger L1/L2 cache, and the added cache only really helps when doing repetitive tasks (like a server!) So in theory, dual PII 350s should outperform one Xeon in any benchmark except repetitive actions. What do you think?

[Fubarian]

Yea, its kinda like a p4 / amd flamer fight. Every processor does something better than another. The big thing with the Xeon is...well, the L2 runs at full speed (2meg L2 at xMhz! holy crap!) and from what my manager said, thats really it. I could load a larger amount of numbers to bust out in a shorter amount of time so the average user, wouldn't notice a thing...

oh, and you can pump 'em up to 32 processors! (can a 64 be done?)