|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | FW: [gislist] Sum Processor question |
| Date: |
01/13/2004 10:40:04 AM |
| From: |
Elizabeth Martinez |
|
|
I am getting some more great responses to my processor question.
Consider the following. Sounds like a great idea.
E
-----Original Message-----
From: David A. Adair [mailto:Adairski@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:08 AM
To: Elizabeth Martinez
Cc: Adairski Z (BlackJet)
Subject: Re: [gislist] Sum Processor question
Elizabeth,
I've been running dual processor machines since the Pentium Pro came out
in 1996. I run both ESRI and ERDAS (Leica) Imagine, and am always in
pursuit of a faster machine. I've found that everything (ESRI too) runs
about 30-40 percent faster with a dual processor even if the software is
not multi-threaded. I guess it is just the operating system handles
overhead tasks more efficiently. I've run several Xeon boxes, and have
never really noticed a speed difference over a regular processor.
My best results come from the following:
1) Dual Intel Processors (not AMD)
2) RAM (500 MB to 1 GB)
3) Video Card - yes it is very crucial!
4) RAID 0 configuration
I get just as good of a performance with ATA hard drives as I do with
SCSI, but I save a bundle without buying SCSI and Xeon. My fastest
machines to date, and you might find this hard to believe, are my dual
processor PIII (yes 3) 1 GHz boxes. P4 chips were rushed into
production before their time to compete with AMD. They are good for
streaming video, but GIS and remote sensing tasks run quite a bit better
with PIII. I can't explain it and I don't want to know much more
detail, because like you I'm a small business owner and my time is
better spent producing income!
Those specs above are pretty critical. Too much RAM, and my machines
slow down. I use the ATI Radeon cards, because they do OpenGL very
well. RAID 0, because your disk I/O is always going to be your
bottleneck.
Hope this helps,
David Adair
Adairski@blackjet.biz
BlackJet Aviation, Inc
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Martinez" < <mailto:elizabeth@forestlandgroup.com>
elizabeth@forestlandgroup.com>
To: "gis list" < <mailto:gislist@lists.geocomm.com>
gislist@lists.geocomm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:55 AM
Subject: [gislist] Sum Processor question
> Hello list,
>
> I received a lot of responses and I am still trying to make a decision
> about my new machine. Here is what I have learned so far.
>
> Original posting was:
> ** I am preparing to buy a new desktop and want to know if the
Pentium
> 4 with hyper threading is a benefit for GIS (ESRI products) or if it
is
> of no use... I ask this in response to the following footnote on the
> spec sheet for the desktop
>
> **The Hyper-Threading feature is a new technology designed to improve
> performance of multi-threaded software products: please contact your
> software provider to determine software compatibility. Not all
customers
> or software applications will benefit from the use of hyperthreading
>
> RESPONSES:
>
> ESRI product does not access both threads of hyper thread processor.
>
> The design preference for a computer running GIS seems to be to have
two
> processors, but the cost benefit considerations result in maximizing
> processor, RAM, video card, and Hard Drive as the lowest cost way to
> increase performance.
>
> ( How does a better video card improve GIS performance ?)
>
> It was suggested that I look at a Xeon processor. Apparently you can
> also enable the hyper-threading with the Xeon processor. I priced
these
> and they are more expensive than the Pentium 4, but ramp up to server
> level cache sizes ( and cost).
>
> This is where I started considering the cache size since I have been
> focusing only on RAM and hard Drives in the past. However in looking
at
> the Xeon I noticed that additional chip sets could be purchased as
well,
> they are not required but seem to be part of maximizing the XEON
> processor performance. I need to research what these do and if I need
> them to really make a difference for the investment.
>
> The other factor is looking down the road of life span for the
computer,
> and the computers that I will be replacing. I look at a three ( and
> sometimes four) year life span for the computers I buy for our (small)
> company. Since I am also responsible for directing and doing the GIS
> work I have a particular need for speed and resources. However, I am
in
> the process of getting key staff to use GIS in their work and they are
> all using laptops. As was pointed out in one of the responses "
>
> ***While none of the GIS application
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
