Decompression benchmark req.

E

eloj

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 31, 2000
Messages
3,612
I want to build a linux server based on an EPIA board (the EN15000 is a likely candidate), but I haven't been able to locate any good integer/mem performance benchmarks. I have an old K6-2 @ 400MHz today that the setup would have to be competitive with. I'm looking for someone that could tell me their setup, and the speed of unpacking a linux kernel or any RAR file (just give me the time and size).

It can be any board/CPU, I'm just looking for one that can actually be used to decompress files and compile the occasional kernel at a level of the K6-2 or beyond.
 
SHORT ANSWER:

Yes, it's powerful enough.

LONG ANSWER:

Via is not your only option for low-power computing these days.

Here's a good review, I've linked the page with the Sandra numbers to give you an idea of raw performance:

http://www.sudhian.com/index.php?/articles/show/817/3

They look interesting, because Via finally managed to ramp up the clock speeds high enough to give you the performance of a Pentium III 800. The price, however, is not so impressive:

Despite all the hoopla over Via moving to 90 nm and producing a tiny chip. Despite rampant competition in the MiniITX market, with both Socket 754 and socket 479 boards available with much better performance (not to mention better power / performance ratios), you'd think they'd be cheaper. But no, Via is doing their usual, charging you $290! just for a 1.5 GHz processor and board (and it's not even PASSIVE, it requires a fan).

In the end, we know why it requires a fan. Just take a look at these power consumption numbers:

http://www.sudhian.com/index.php?/articles/show/817/11

The Athlon 64 Sempron with Cool 'n Quiet has been delivering the "low power" of the C7 for years, and does it with lower price and better performance. Unless you absolutely need small form-factor, or the best encryption engine money can buy, I'd pass on the C7.

If you want the absolute LOWEST power consumption, I suggest you resist the urge to buy a regular PC powersupply. Instead, you can power your Sempron system with the very same high-efficiency 12v powersupplies plus picoPSU that people are using to get low power draw for their Via boards.
 
defaultluser said:
...the best encryption engine money can buy, I'd pass on the C7.
Click to expand...
Sorry I just stopped by (and know nothing of via chips) but could you explain/expand on this point?
 
Darakian said:
Sorry I just stopped by (and know nothing of via chips) but could you explain/expand on this point?
Click to expand...

The C3 and C7 have hardware random number generators and hardware support for certain aspects of crypto.

You don't have to look far to find a review touting the impressive crypto performance of the C7, because that's the only thing it's good at.

See this review:

http://www.hardwareinreview.com/cms/content/view/44/1/
 
defaultluser said:
The C3 and C7 have hardware random number generators and hardware support for certain aspects of crypto.

You don't have to look far to find a review touting the impressive crypto performance of the C7, because that's the only thing it's good at.

See this review:

http://www.hardwareinreview.com/cms/content/view/44/1/
Click to expand...

From the review:
Since the EPIA CN13000G includes PadLock, I figured I'd use the openssl speed command to show just what a difference it makes in OpenSSL cryptographic speed. Unfortunately, after performing the test on several different operating systems, I couldn't seem to harness the PadLock encryption engine through OpenSSL. I even tried OpenBSD, which supports more software and hardware encryption options than any other operating system, and fully supported the previous version of PadLock.

Below I have listed the speed test numbers as they happened. Obviously the PadLock engine was not in use, and I could not figure out a way to make it work within the week's time I had to do performance testing. As I understand it, I need a Linux kernel newer than 2.6.16, and I have to add a special patch to it. I tried that, but it still didn't work, so I think it's safe to say that at very least the majority of people who buy the EPIA CN13000G will not be able to take advantage of its integrated encryption engine in GNU/Linux or *BSD in the near future.
Click to expand...
just figured that i should point that out.
 
Indeed, I saw that and it more or less killed the interest for me :p
 
Wow, I previously misread the article I linked...I thought the second set of scores was the C7 :D

But yeah, those first set of scores are completely representative of the C7 without acceleration, and are the reason I don't really like the Winchip architecture. Winchips score well in some benchmarks, but in more complex code the lack of out-of-order execution really hurts performance. When you combine that with the single-pipeline design, the Winchip gets left in the dust by modern processors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top