SQL Server Performance

Processor Performance 2006

Discussion in 'Performance-Related Article Discussions' started by shanetasker, Jul 18, 2006.

  1. shanetasker New Member

  2. joechang New Member

    the new Montecito core Itanium is launched,
    instead of asking shane to reformat the entire 6000 word article, i will post new info here.

    HP Integrity rx6600
    4 x 1.6GHz Dual Core Itanium 9050, 1x24M L3 cache
    192 GB memory
    5 QLogic QLA 2342 FC controllers
    756 36GB 15K U320 drives
    8 300GB 10K U320 for logs
    18 MSA 1000 + 36 MSA30 for data
    1MSA 1000 for log
    344,928 tpm-C

    this is better than the expected performance for 4 socket Tulsa processor (320K ?)
    and much better than the 4 socket DC Opteron 2.6GHz (214K)
    for results on SQL Server 2005 and Windows Server 2003

    given that SPEC CPU 2000 integer results to date show only slight gains for Montecito over Madison, the possible explanations for the very Montecito TPC-C result is either the very large 24M L3 cache or hyper-threading
    HT was very problematic with the Xeon line.
    My tests showed that HT only helped in handling the network round-trip,
    no SQL Query showed gain, some negative results.
    SQL also had problems with sequential disk IO when using all logical procs.
    HT showed big performance gains with the Quest/Imceda LiteSpeed compression engine, which has no contention issues.
    if i had to guess, the Itanium team improved HT performance for SQL queries on the Montecito
  3. joechang New Member

    The first benchmark result (TPC-H) for Tulsa (2x65nm Prescott cores, 16M shared L3 cache) is out

    Dell PowerEdge 6800
    4 x Dual Core Intel Xeon MP 7140 3.4GHz, 16M L3 $22K ?
    64GB $53K
    3 PERC/5E SAS PCI-E adapters
    270 36GB SAS hard drives

    16,320 QphH @ 100GB

    this is just moderately better than HP's result for the 7041 (DC 3.0GHz) at 14,242 QphH @ 100GB
    and much better than Dell's 7041 result of 11,529 QppH

    there is evidence to suggest that the big cache is important for transaction processing applications but not as important for DW apps.

Share This Page