We have produced the following currently publicly available reports for Intel Corp. Reports are listed with the most recent first.
64-bit Black-Scholes financial workload performance and power consumption on multiprocessor Intel- and AMD-based servers We measured the 64-bit Black-Scholes financial application-based workload performance and power consumption on servers using the following three processors: AMD Opteron processor 8360 SE, Intel Xeon processor X7350, and Intel Xeon processor X7460.
64-bit SunGard Adaptiv Analytics Benchmark financial workload performance and power consumption on multiprocessor Intel- and AMD-based servers We measured the performance of the 64-bit SunGard Adaptiv Analytics Benchmark workload on servers using the following three processors: AMD Opteron processor 8360 SE, Intel Xeon processor X7350, and Intel Xeon processor X7460.
SPEC CPU2006 SPECint_rate performance and power consumption on multiprocessor Intel- and AMD-based servers We measured the SPEC CPU2006 performance and power consumption on servers using the following three processors: AMD Opteron processor 8360 SE, Intel Xeon processor X7350, and Intel Xeon processor X7460.
vConsolidate performance and power on Intel- and AMD-based servers running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.2 We measured power and performance with Intel’s vConsolidate version 2.0 (Profile 3) workload on quad-processor servers running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.2 using the following processors: AMD Opteron processor 8360 S, Intel Xeon processor X7350, and Intel Xeon processor X7460.
vConsolidate performance and power on quad- and dual-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers We measured performance and power with Intel’s vConsolidate version 2.0 (Profile 2) workload using Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V on quad-processor servers using the following processors: Intel Xeon processor X7460, Intel Xeon processor X7350, AMD Opteron processor 8360 SE, Intel Xeon processor X5470.
vConsolidate performance on quad-processor Intel processor-based servers We measured performance and power with Intel’s vConsolidate version 2.0 (Profile 2) workload using Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V on quad-processor servers using the following processors: Intel Xeon processor X7460 and Intel Xeon processor X7350.
Performance of four Intel-and AMD-based servers SMB servers using WebBench, LoadSim, and SysBench We measured the performance while running multiple benchmarks simultaneously on small and medium-sized business (SMB) focused servers using the following processors: Intel Pentium® Dual-core processor E2160, Quad-Core Intel Xeon® processor X3220, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3350.
Performance comparison of three notebook PCs with Intel and VIA processors (full report, one-page summary) We tested the following notebooks: an HP 2133 Mini-Note PC with a VIA C7-M 1.20GHz processor, an HP 530 Notebook PC with an Intel Celeron M 520 1.60GHz processor, and an HP Compaq 6720s Notebook PC with an Intel Celeron 550 2.00GHz processor. We ran five custom consumer application tests.
Performance comparison of two desktop PCs with Intel and AMD processors. We tested systems using an AMD Phenom X4 Quad-Core 9500 2.20GHz and an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.40GHz. We conducted industry-standard benchmarks, custom consumer application tests, and game benchmarks.
Performance of three Intel-based SMB servers using WebBench, LoadSim, and SysBench We tested servers using the following processors: Intel Pentium® Dual-core processor E2160, Quad-Core Intel Xeon® processor X3220, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3350.
Intel Modular Server performance on simultaneous email, Web server, Java, and database workloads We measured the system performance of the Intel Modular Server built on Intel Multi-Flex Technology to compare the performance of each Server Compute Module in two states: with that one Server Compute Module running alone and with all Server Compute Modules running simultaneously.
Performance and energy consumption of notebook PCs with Intel* and AMD* processors (Vendor 1 report and Vendor 2 report) We tested two pairs of notebook systems. Each pair of systems came from the same vendor and used the following processors: AMD* Turion* 64 X2 TL-60 2.0GHz and Intel Core 2 Duo® T7300 2.0GHz.
vConsolidate performance on dual-socket Intel- and AMD-based servers We tested dual-socket servers using three processors: Quad-Core AMD Opteron 2347 (1.9GHz), Quad-Core Intel Xeon X5365 (3.0GHz), and Quad-Core Intel Xeon X5460 (3.16GHz). Note: The AMD processor contains an erratum in the translation lookaside buffer (TLB). According to AMD and industry reports, implementing the BIOS workaround would likely reduce performance. SuperMicro confirmed that the BIOS in the AMD-based servers in this test did not implement the workaround for the AMD TLB erratum.
Performance and battery life ratings of two notebook PCs with Intel processors. We tested two notebook systems: Toshiba Satellite A200-03V, an Intel Pentium dual-core processor T2310-based system, and Toshiba Satellite A200-24V, an Intel Core 2 Duo processor T5250-based system.
Performance and battery life ratings of 10 notebook PCs with Intel and AMD processors (full report, one-page summary) We ran BAPCo’s MobileMark 2007 Productivity test on five pairs of notebook PCs that came from three different vendors and ranged from mainstream notebooks to high-end systems.
64-bit Black-Scholes financial workload performance on dual-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers We tested servers using the following five processors: Dual-Core AMD Opteron 2220 (2.8GHz), Dual-Core Intel Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz), Quad-Core AMD Opteron 2347 (1.9GHz), Quad-Core Intel Xeon X5365 (3.0GHz), Quad-Core Intel Xeon X5460 (3.16GHz).
64-bit Black-Scholes financial workload performance and power consumption on dual-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers We tested servers using the following three processors: Quad-Core AMD Opteron 2347 (1.9GHz), Quad-Core Intel Xeon E5345 (2.33GHz), Quad-Core Intel Xeon E5450 (3.0GHz).
Total cost of ownership analysis for various computing models (white paper) We summarize our analysis of the six computing models, drawing on our hands-on testing, our TCO calculator, and our research.
Total cost of ownership analysis for various computing models – Supporting data for performance and sizing calculations We discuss the methodologies and results of the performance and sizing tests we ran on the various platforms. We used this data as input for the calculator and the other documents.
Various computing models: Total cost of ownership analysis (PowerPoint presentation) We analyze the direct and indirect costs for all six platforms. In addition, we consider the impact of these platforms on the cost of a Microsoft Vista migration as well as the consequences of working across slow local network links and wide-area networks.
TCO calculator (Excel) We used this calculator to examine the costs of the various platforms in our sample enterprise. You can estimate the costs of these platforms in your enterprise by entering specific parameters that reflect your infrastructure.
WebBench performance on Intel®-based SMB servers We tested three dual- and quad-core servers: Intel Pentium Dual-core processor E2160-based server, Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3220-based server, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor E5335-based server.
SysBench performance on Intel®-based SMB servers We tested three dual- and quad-core servers: Intel Pentium Dual-core processor E2160-based server, Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3220-based server, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor E5335-based server.
Performance of three Intel®-based SMB servers using WebBench, LoadSim, and SysBench We measured performance while running multiple benchmarks simultaneously on three dual- and quad-core small and medium-sized business (SMB) focused servers: Intel Pentium Dual-core processor E2160-based server, Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3220-based server, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor E5335-based server. We ran benchmarks that simulated three aspects of a typical small business server workload: Web, email, and database. We used WebBench to simulate Web traffic, Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 Load Simulator (LoadSim) to simulate email activity, and SysBench to simulate the database activity.
Performance and energy consumption of three notebook PCs with Intel processors We tested notebook systems using three processors: HP 510 Intel Pentium M notebook processor 770, HP Compaq nc6320 Intel Core Duo notebook processor T2500, and HP Compaq 6910p Intel Core 2 Duo notebook processor T7300.
Comparative performance test Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.1 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 AS on Intel-based servers (PowerPoint Presentation) Red Hat, Inc. and Intel Corp. commissioned us to compare the performance of three servers, a Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 3 server on a Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 7140M-based (3.4 GHz) server, a Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 3 guest on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.1 server on a Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X7350-based (2.93 GHz) server, and a Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.1 server on a Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X7350-based (2.93 GHz) server on three different workloads. This presentation, which we gave at Fall IDF in San Francisco on September 19, 2007, summarizes our findings.
Options for reducing manageability costs Enterprises seeking to reduce manageability costs are considering multiple computing models available today. This Intel®-commissioned white paper examines two current models that can help achieve this goal: (1) Intel® vPro™ processor technology and Intel® Centrino™ Pro processor technology clients and (2) server-based computing. We pay particular attention to the biggest management cost factors: asset management, down time, desk-side visits, and regulatory compliance.
Manageability cost calculator Enterprises seeking to reduce manageability costs are considering multiple computing models available today. This Intel®-commissioned Excel calculator lets you compare costs associated with two current models: (1) Intel® vPro™ processor technology and Intel® Centrino™ Pro processor technology clients and (2) server-based computing.
Options for reducing intrusion security risks Enterprises seeking to reduce security costs are considering multiple computing models available today. This Intel®-commissioned white paper examines two current models that can help achieve this goal: (1) Intel® vPro™ processor technology and Intel® Centrino™ Pro processor technology clients and (2) server-based computing. We pay particular attention to the computer crime categories that account for the majority of security-related financial losses. We restrict our scope to intrusion security: creating a more secure environment while not intruding on the work of authorized users.
Productivity cost calculator This calculator estimates the increase in cost of lost productivity for users of server-based computing with thin clients compared to well-managed rich clients. We include estimates for an example enterprise plus a set of estimates that you can modify to get a rough idea of costs for your enterprise.
64-bit Black-Scholes financial workload performance on multi-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers The Black-Scholes kernel workload uses a financial modeling algorithm for the pricing of European-style options. We used Black-Scholes to evaluate the performance of multi-processor servers using the following processors: dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 8222 SE, Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 7140M, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X5365, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X7350.
SPECjbb performance and power consumption on multi-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers SPECjbb2005 is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to measure a server’s Java performance. We used SPECjbb2005 to evaluate the performance of servers using the following processors: dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 8222 SE, Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 7140M, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X5365, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X7350.
SPEC CPU2006 SPECint_rate_base performance and power consumption on multi-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers SPEC CPU 2000 SPECint_rate_base is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to provide a comparative measure of compute-intensive integer performance. We used it to evaluate the performance and power consumption of servers using the following processors: dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 8220, Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 7140M, Quad-core Intel Xeon processor E7340, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X7345.
64-bit Black-Scholes financial workload performance on multi-processor Intel- and AMD-based servers The Black-Scholes kernel workload uses a financial modeling algorithm for the pricing of European-style options. We used Black-Scholes to evaluate the performance of multi-processor servers using the following processors: dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 8220, Dual-Core Intel Xeon processor 7140M, Quad-core Intel Xeon processor E7340, and Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X7345.
WebBench performance and power consumption on uniprocessor Intel- and AMD-processor-based servers WebBench measures Web server performance by using large numbers of physical test clients to generate an HTTP based workload against a Web server under test. We measured WebBench performance and power consumption on servers using the following processors: AMD Opteron processor model 1214, Intel Pentium D processor 840, Intel Pentium D processor 950, Intel Xeon processor 3070, and Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor X3220.
Thin clients: Exploring rollout costs While thin clients can appear to be far less expensive to deploy than rich clients, many costs of adopting thin clients are not initially visible. In this white paper, we examine the many types of changes and costs organizations should consider when contemplating deploying thin clients.
Thin client conversion cost calculator This Microsoft Excel spreadsheet calculator identifies and quantifies the costs of a thin client rollout in which the thin clients are replacing existing PCs. It includes six cost categories: application servers, network infrastructure, planning, application migration, training, and software licensing.
Rich clients with thin client security: A hybrid approach In this white paper, we examine how to deliver some of the data security characteristics traditionally associated with thin clients on rich clients. We concentrate on data security, the prevention of theft of data from computers. In particular, we address the data-security differences between thin and rich clients and how IT departments can overcome those differences.
ClearCube PC Blade vs. thin client performance in typical office application scenarios We compared the performance of ClearCube Model R1200 PC Blades and two types of thin clients on test networks with varying numbers of active clients, each running the same typical office application tasks. We measured the response time users would experience on each system while performing common office functions with leading office applications.
SPECjbb2005 performance with RHEL v4.4 on Intel- and AMD-processor-based servers SPECjbb2005 is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to measure a server’s Java performance.
SPECint_rate_base 2000 performance with RHEL v.4.4 on Intel- and AMD-processor-based servers SPEC CPU 2000 SPECint_rate_base is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to provide a comparative measure of compute-intensive integer performance. We used IT to evaluate the performance and power consumption of [dual- quad-processor] servers using the following processors: Supermicro A+ Server 2021M-T2R+V with dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 2220 SE and Supermicro SuperServer 6025B-T2R+V with Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X5355.
SPECfp_rate_base 2000 2000 performance with RHEL v.4.4 on Intel- and AMD-processor-based serversSPEC CPU 2000 SPECfp_rate_base is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to provide a comparative measure of compute-intensive floating point performance. We used it to evaluate the performance and power consumption of the following dual-processor servers: Supermicro A+ Server 2021M-T2R+V with dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 2220 SE and Supermicro SuperServer 6025B-T2R+V with Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X5355.
Linpack HPL performance with RHEL v.4.4 on Intel- and AMD-processor-based servers Linpack is an industry-standard benchmark that solves linear equations and uses the speed of the system under test at that task as a measure of the system's floating point performance. We used Linpack to evaluate the performance of the following dual-processor servers: Supermicro SuperServer 6025B-TR+V with dual-core AMD Opteron processor model 2220 SE and Supermicro SuperServer 6025B-TR+V with Quad-core Intel Xeon processor X5355.
WebBench performance on Intel- and AMD-processor-based servers running Red Hat Enterprise Linux v.4.4 WebBench measures Web server performance by using large numbers of physical test clients to generate an HTTP based workload against a Web server under test.
Three SPEC workloads test Intel- and IBM-based servers SPECjbb2005 is an industry-standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation to measure a server’s Java performance. We used SPECjbb2005 and two SPEC CPU2000 workloads to measure the performance and power consumption of servers with the following processors: the Intel Itanium 2 9050 and IBM System p5 550Q POWER5+.
