Athlon II X4 620

Come join the... uh... er... fold.

Moderators: just brew it!, farmpuma

Athlon II X4 620

Postposted on Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:30 pm

Deal of the week! What is the latest thinking on this processor in a Linux Box for folding. Is the limited L2 cache and no L3 cache an issue? Any issue with memory type or speed (DDR2 or DDR3, 667, 800, 1060)?
The older I get, the faster I was.
SmokinJoe-Salem
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:01 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon

Re: Athlon II X4 620

Postposted on Sun Sep 20, 2009 1:43 pm

If you are big into folding then I think it is better to use the GPU client and an Nvidia card, like a 9800 GTX or something.
flip-mode
Gerbil Khan
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 9084
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: Athlon II X4 620

Postposted on Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:05 am

An answer to my own question.
This is a fairly direct comparison between two processors.
Intel-Q6600 2.4 GHz, 4GB DDR2-PC6400-800MHz and
AMD-X4-620 2.6 GHZ, 2GB DDR2-PC8500-1066MHz
Both booted to 64 bit-Umbuntu 9.04. Both folding 1920 point A2 (2.10) core units
4 units on the intel averaged 6.462 min/frame
5 units on the AMD averaged 6.218 min/frame
One would expect the AMD would fold faster because of its higher clock speed, it does
However the AMDs clock speed is 8.3% faster than the Intels but it folds at only 3.7% faster.
This discrepancy is explained by the AMD smaller L2 cache and no L3 cache,... I think.
My disappointment is attenuated by the AMDs price tag...$99
The older I get, the faster I was.
SmokinJoe-Salem
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:01 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon

Re: Athlon II X4 620

Postposted on Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:34 am

SmokinJoe-Salem wrote:This discrepancy is explained by the AMD smaller L2 cache and no L3 cache,... I think.

The answer may not be so simple I think. The C2Q has well-known performance of SSE instructions, which the SMP Gromacs love. Back then the Core 2 architecture owned the K8's in that department and the Phenom/Athlon II is now catching up (do them beat the older Core 2's? Not sure based on the results).

Edit: spelling
Last edited by Flying Fox on Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
The Model M is not for the faint of heart. You either like them or hate them.

Gerbils unite! Fold for UnitedGerbilNation, team 2630.
Flying Fox
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 24285
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am

Re: Athlon II X4 620

Postposted on Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:41 am

Flying Fox wrote:
SmokinJoe-Salem wrote:This discrepancy is explained by the AMD smaller L2 cache and no L3 cache,... I think.

The answer may not be so simple I think. The C2Q has well-known performance of SSE instructions, which the SMP Gromacs love. Back then the Core 2 architecture owned the K8's in that depart and the Phenom/Athlon II is now catching up (do them beat the older Core 2's? Not sure based on the results).


This is what I was thinking too; C2's biggest strength was that it combined the advances in CPU design gleaned from attempting to make Netburst a marketable product with a supercharged SSE2 unit, which made a huge difference with applications needing to be SSE2 optimized in order to simply function on Netburst. /History

We'd have to assume that it's a combination of the two. I'm also willing to bet that if you explored overclocking, you'd get the clock on that Athlon II quite a bit higher than the Q's when overclocked, more than making up for the Q's relatively higher IPC advantage.
Canon 6D||[24-105/4L IS USM|100/2.8L Macro IS USM|70-300/4-5.6 IS USM|40/2.8 STM|50/1.4 USM|85/1.8 USM|Samyang/Bower 14/2.8 Full-Manual Rectilinear Wide-angle|
Canon EOS-M|11-22/4-5.6 IS STM|22/2 STM|EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM|
For sale!|24/2.8 IS USM
|
Airmantharp
Maximum Gerbil
 
Posts: 4962
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:41 pm


Return to TR Distributed Computing Effort

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests