octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's - SGI

This is a discussion on octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's - SGI ; Hi all, I just upgraded to a newer octane, and played around with trying to compare my old dual 250 mhz R10k to a new single 300mhz R12k and single 400mhz R12k. I didnt really think the single 300mhz CPU ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's

  1. octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's

    Hi all,
    I just upgraded to a newer octane, and played around with trying to
    compare my old dual 250 mhz R10k to a new single 300mhz R12k and single
    400mhz R12k.

    I didnt really think the single 300mhz CPU would be much faster than a
    dual 250 mhz CPU setup, but I was wrong Had I known I would have
    upgraded much sooner.

    I did two types of benchmarks to give me a general idea, a gzip/gunzip
    comparision on a 1.3Gb tarball, and an xmame test

    I should add the fact the the dual 250mhz octane is an older model
    octane, and the 300mhz and 400mhz tests were done on a newer model
    octane2, but with older octane1 gfx.

    here are the results using the sgi-freeware built "xmame (x11) version
    0.61.2 (Dec 2 2002)" running "Pulstar" - my favorite Neo-Geo shooter
    game (note - audio was turned off).

    on the dual 250mhz, frame rate is about 34 fps
    on the single 300mhz, frame rate is about 45 fps
    on the single 400mhz, frame rate is about 55 fps


    the second test involved gzip'ing and gunzip'ing a 1.3Gb tarball. The
    same system disk and option drive were used (both 10k rpm).

    ==================================

    dual 250mhz

    octane 14# ls -lh
    total 2823200
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 14:26 IRIX6.5.22m.tar

    octane 15# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    985.1u 31.4s 17:18 97% 0+0k 22074+0io 1pf+0w

    octane 17# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    166.3u 21.9s 3:17 95% 0+0k 19931+0io 0pf+0w

    ==================================

    single 300mhz

    octane 12# ls -lh
    total 2823200
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 15:38 IRIX6.5.22m.tar

    octane 13# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    802.1u 22.7s 13:59 98% 0+0k 22079+0io 1pf+0w

    octane 14# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    131.4u 17.0s 2:40 92% 0+0k 19998+1296io 3pf+0w

    ==================================

    single 400mhz

    octane 9# ls -lh
    total 2823200
    -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 17:07 IRIX6.5.22m.tar

    octane 10# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    600.1u 18.4s 10:29 98% 0+0k 22075+0io 1pf+0w

    octane 11# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    98.3u 14.2s 2:11 85% 0+0k 19944+1300io 1pf+0w

    ==================================

    I hope this info can help someone.

    cheers!
    mike



  2. Re: octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's



    mike wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > I just upgraded to a newer octane, and played around with trying to
    > compare my old dual 250 mhz R10k to a new single 300mhz R12k and single
    > 400mhz R12k.
    >
    > I didnt really think the single 300mhz CPU would be much faster than a
    > dual 250 mhz CPU setup, but I was wrong


    Much of the speedup can be attributed to the 2MB L2 (secondary) cache
    in the R12K CPU module. Most of the R10K-250 duals had only 1MB
    L2 cache. The clock frequency increase helps, but not nearly as
    much as the secondary cache.

    --
    Greg Douglas
    Reputable Systems
    http://www.reputable.com


  3. Re: octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's



    whst do you think of dual 360MHz vs single 400MHz ?

    thanks

    Rick

    In article <3FD3A50C.FB415E47@comcast.net>, mike wrote:
    > Hi all,
    > I just upgraded to a newer octane, and played around with trying to
    > compare my old dual 250 mhz R10k to a new single 300mhz R12k and single
    > 400mhz R12k.
    >
    > I didnt really think the single 300mhz CPU would be much faster than a
    > dual 250 mhz CPU setup, but I was wrong Had I known I would have
    > upgraded much sooner.
    >
    > I did two types of benchmarks to give me a general idea, a gzip/gunzip
    > comparision on a 1.3Gb tarball, and an xmame test
    >
    > I should add the fact the the dual 250mhz octane is an older model
    > octane, and the 300mhz and 400mhz tests were done on a newer model
    > octane2, but with older octane1 gfx.
    >
    > here are the results using the sgi-freeware built "xmame (x11) version
    > 0.61.2 (Dec 2 2002)" running "Pulstar" - my favorite Neo-Geo shooter
    > game (note - audio was turned off).
    >
    > on the dual 250mhz, frame rate is about 34 fps
    > on the single 300mhz, frame rate is about 45 fps
    > on the single 400mhz, frame rate is about 55 fps
    >
    >
    > the second test involved gzip'ing and gunzip'ing a 1.3Gb tarball. The
    > same system disk and option drive were used (both 10k rpm).
    >
    >==================================
    >
    > dual 250mhz
    >
    > octane 14# ls -lh
    > total 2823200
    > -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 14:26 IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    >
    > octane 15# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    > 985.1u 31.4s 17:18 97% 0+0k 22074+0io 1pf+0w
    >
    > octane 17# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    > 166.3u 21.9s 3:17 95% 0+0k 19931+0io 0pf+0w
    >
    >==================================
    >
    > single 300mhz
    >
    > octane 12# ls -lh
    > total 2823200
    > -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 15:38 IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    >
    > octane 13# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    > 802.1u 22.7s 13:59 98% 0+0k 22079+0io 1pf+0w
    >
    > octane 14# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    > 131.4u 17.0s 2:40 92% 0+0k 19998+1296io 3pf+0w
    >
    >==================================
    >
    > single 400mhz
    >
    > octane 9# ls -lh
    > total 2823200
    > -rw-r--r-- 1 root sys 1.3G Dec 3 17:07 IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    >
    > octane 10# time gzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar
    > 600.1u 18.4s 10:29 98% 0+0k 22075+0io 1pf+0w
    >
    > octane 11# time gunzip IRIX6.5.22m.tar.gz
    > 98.3u 14.2s 2:11 85% 0+0k 19944+1300io 1pf+0w
    >
    >==================================
    >
    > I hope this info can help someone.
    >
    > cheers!
    > mike
    >
    >


  4. Re: octane 2x250 vs 1x300 vs 1x400 CPU's

    > whst do you think of dual 360MHz vs single 400MHz ?

    dual CPU's are better I would think in this case - they make the system seem
    a little more snappy. At the time when I had the impulse to buy the CPU
    upgrade, the dual 360's were going for around $1200, and the single 400mhz
    was $400. I just went for the cheaper deal.


+ Reply to Thread