🚀 go-pugleaf

In comp.os.linux.hardware Totally Lost <idletime@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <3751F4D8.8C0C9B65@dakotacom.net>,
>   CB <NocbaisanSpam@dakotacom.net> wrote:

> [bulk of extensive interrogation deleted]

>> I am perfectly willing to entertain the possibility that some of your
> assertions
>> may be on the money - but you really didn't offer more than some
> general
>> theoretical arguments and cautions.  Well, I don't have a Linux server
> to run
>> through the paces, so I'm not much help either...
>>
>> CB

> It seems pointless to respond. I offered some seasoned caution, the
> concerns should be explored by anyone that is considering using a
> Celeron as a production server, or with other than small footprint
> applications. This guy appears both hostile, and doesn't even have
> a stake in the outcome.

> We are continually offered advise, some must personally experience the
> pain before they are convinced of negative outcomes. The Darwin awards
> exist for a reason :)

The bottom line from my limited experience with dual celerons and
substantial experience with dual PPro's and PII/III's is that:

* The likely outcome is an increase in performance.
* The degree of performance increase is application dependent.
* Given "ideal" conditions, it's possible to get a degradation
  in performance if the application needs the additional L2 cache.
* Given those same "ideal" conditions, it may also be a problem
  to use bona fide PII/PIII's.

I'm not sure why some folks are getting all worked up over this.

C
-- 
Christopher Mauritz
ritz@mordor.net