From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:08:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:08:05 -0400 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:48904 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:08:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Dual 1.7 GHz Xeon -- slow, interrupts not balance, etc To: ossama@doc.ece.uci.edu (Ossama Othman) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:10:18 +0100 (BST) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ossama@uci.edu In-Reply-To: <20010816145446.B7801@ece.uci.edu> from "Ossama Othman" at Aug 16, 2001 02:54:46 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL5] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I've been trying to figure out why two Dell Precision 530 Workstations > (dual 1.7 GHZ Intel Xeon) we just purchased running Linux (I installed > Debian with 2.4.7 and 2.4.8 kernels) are much slower than expected. > Note that they were just as slow with the vanilla RedHat 7.1 > installation they were shipped with. Our dual 1 GHz PIII is just as > fast as they are. I'm not sure if it's a hardware or kernel If you look at the figures from the various benchmarking sites that doesnt sound unexpected. If you can recode your applications (eg if its a complex analysis problem) to use SSE2 and the like you may well get big speed ups > hardware. No SCSI, all IDE. 400 MHz RDRAM, etc. However, the PIII > box only has 512MB RAM compared to the 1 GB of RAM the Xeon boxes > have. The impact of that depends entirely on your application > Any ideas why CPU1 isn't getting any interrupts? Incidentally, > interrupts appear to be fairly well balanced on our PIII box. Do the boot messages ay anothing about this ?