We replaced our main line of business server with a new one. The old server had dual Xeon X5690s in it (2 generation old chip), the new server has quad Xeon E7-4807s. We expect processor performance to at least stay the same.
Our main java app showed a 50% performance hit and on running a sysbench against the two machines, the old processors were 50% faster.
Is this a particularly bad chip ? Is there something we are missing performance wise ?
(Os on both is Centos 5.10 x86_64 and memory is 128GB)
Best Answer
Kinda...
This is a good lesson in resource-planning and making hardware decisions across CPU lines and generations. I've had the unique experience of needing high-end CPUs for applications in a few different industries, but also the luxury of being able to test and benchmark before major architecture changes.
As a result of this, my rule is to examine the product lines and move to processors that have comparable positions in the portfolio when you make hardware changes.
What's better? A 2010 Mercedes S-Class or a 2014 Mercedes C-Class? It depends...
Intel Comparison Chart - Comparing the x5690 and E7-4807
So what's wrong?
Your "new" server is also running an older architecture. Remember, the bigger server platforms (quad-socket, etc.) don't rev as often as the smaller systems. You have a CPU that's running around half the clock speed of the previous CPU, but of the same generation, thus the performance drop. The E7-4807 is also missing Turbo Boost.
I'd be interested to know what prompted the upgrade. You likely had the raw CPU performance you needed. Was it memory or another factor? What was the bottleneck?
A better move if you simply needed additional cores would have been a newer dual-socket system, but with top-line Intel E5-2643v2 (3.5GHz) or E5-2697v2 (2.9GHz) CPUs.