Am 22. Oct, 2013 schwätzte Kevin Fries so:

moin moin,

> As a general rule...
>
> AMD is generally slower, with more cores.  Its by design.  Their philosophy

Same number of cores in this case.

> is that the speed of a single core is less important than doing concurrent
> operations.  This will not change when they finally release their Seattle
> Fabric.

I like the idea of more concurrent ops. Currently keeping cores fairly
evenly busy :).

> That said, they are right or wrong depending on the application.  Some
> applications are more horizontal (can handle lots of concurrent operations
> in issolation) while some are more vertical (lots of processes that depend
> on the output of other processes).  If your usage is more vertical, you
> will want those earlier threads finishing faster to get the later threads
> processing.  Therefore Intel will beat AMD, badly.  On the other hand, lots
> of processes, not having to wait, tips the performance scale more into
> AMD's favor.
>
> Looking at both, I find on the whole, Intel's approach tend to be the
> better one for most individuals.

OK, I'll keep this in mind as I ask about some other options. Danke.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  http://www.LuftHans.com/        http://www.LuftHans.com/Classes/
#  "No software design or plan survives contact with reality."
#  -- Lars Wirzenius, 2012Feb19 http://identi.ca/notice/90842065