Hi all,
Planning to build one linux cluster with 8 cores, this is just for fun, but I want to take maximum juice out of the HW. Could not decide which to use AMD or INTEL?

Thanks

If you want maximum performance, you want Intel, end of story. AMD offers incredible value, but their processors simply are incapable of holding their own in performance. As far as which is better supported, they're both WONDERFULLY supported.

If you decided on 8 cores then want "maximum juice" regardless of price, there is no question you want Intel. The fastest 8 core system you can buy with Intel CPUs is faster than the fastest 8 core system you can buy with AMD CPUs.

But I expect "regardless of price" is not really part of your question.

Once you get into details of what you want to do with the system and how much you plan to spend, you might find that AMD will give you higher performance.

Although many people would say otherwise, I prefer intel at all times. I have nightmares of AMD processors overheating, and they are always just a little bit slower than they should be. I won't turn down an AMD machine, but I'll put an intel chip in it if the socket matches.

The performance between AMD and Intel at this time is about the same. You will not notice the difference between AMD and Intel. Intel does not technically have an 8 core processor. They have six physical core processor, but they costs $1000. AMD has a six core processor and costs no higher than $300.

AMD processors can hold their performance for what Intel model that they are trying to compete with. AMD does not have mid-end processor, so you have to go with high-end or low-end. When the Bulldozer core comes out next year, things will change.

AMD provides better performance to price compared to Intel. If you have no budget, you can go either with Intel or AMD.

I ifI have a choice, I would go with AMD because they are cheaper and performance is too close to call which one is a winner. There no heat issues with AMD processors, so you should not fear about the processor. As with all processors, an adequate or an excessive heat sink is better than not have enough.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks to everybody. My plan here to use 4 numbers of dual core processors and not any single 8 core processor. This will give the protection against single system failure and also option to learn cluster functionality. I will opt for dual core intel for this.

Would you like to please share that exactly what you want to do on this setup? "Just for fun" doesn't describe fully, I am asking this to know that what kind of applications you will be running on this cluster, as different applications has different requirements, may be CPU with higher clock but less cache will help you better or may be you will get more performance from moderate clock but higher cache.

Plus will it be more data processing intensive applications or graphics rendering applications, as per my own experience Intel works better with Data processing applications and AMD beats every one in graphics based apps.

There are a lot of other factors which you can consider before going for a good buy, do a google for the same you will get to know about a lot of factors which can help you decide.

Here is a link which shows some comparisons between Intel and AMD Processors.

thanks,

ashok_kxj2009, If you are just going to try out clustering. AMD is better because it has a price advantage. The AMD Athlon II X2 240e performs around Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 at half the price.

Definitely AMD. The Phenom II X6 1055T is by far the best CPU for the money, having similar performance to the quad-core Intel Core i7s but at a much cheaper price.

AMD

I have been buying AMD for 15 years. To everyones point if you NEED to crunch big numbers, render large chunks of graphics or just want bragging rights to the "fastest" you should go intel.

But if you want the best bang for your buck for normal computer usage you want AMD.

Just do a little shopping and this will be quite apparent.

You should consider an opteron.

I will sing with the choir. AMD is best bang for the buck. Intel has the highest performance for those situations where maximum CPU performance is required.

I think I and other answering this thread have been ignoring the important aspect: What does the OP mean by "cluster".

I saw 8 cores, ignored "cluster" and though about the common layout:
1 box
1 motherboard
2 CPU chips per motherboard
4 cores per CPU chip.

But what is it with dual core chips?
1 motherboard with 4 chips? That is unusual.
More than one motherboard in a box? That is more unusual.
4 separate boxes? That is back to ordinary hardware again, assuming an ordinary LAN connection between the boxes.

If the idea is unusual hardware, then that should be understood first before anything like Intel vs. AMD advice is valid.

If the objective is four complete box dual core systems, Intel seems the less plausible choice. But not clearly wrong. We still don't really know your parameters. If you already made up your mind, good luck.

I had assumed he meant the definition of clustering: