All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Performance of Nano versus Atom
A VIA Nano U2250 should be theoretically somewhat slower than an Atom N2800 (at least for multicore), shouldn't it?
I recently got a Kimsufi machine and that statement does not seem to apply, instead it seems to be actually the other way round. The N2800 is not only in synthetic benchmarks noticably slower than the U2250 (sysbench - single core to be fair though) but also in real world scenarios. For example, a configure of Apache took 70 seconds on the U2250 versus 105 seconds on the N2800 (+50% on supposedly faster hardware).
Even if the single core performance of the N2800 is (for whatever reason) is slower than the U2250's I'd still "assume" in a real world case it should be overall faster. Am I measuring wrong, do I have wrong expectations or is there a performance issue?
Both machines are running a 32 bit Debian, the U2250 Wheezy, the N2800 Stretch. The N2800 is using Debian's standard 4.9 kernel instead of Kimsufi's custom 3.x one (though I think that shouldnt matter in this case here).
Comments
I can confirm this, was surprised to find out some time ago that Nano is about 40% faster than N2800 on single-thread tasks. For example generating a DokuWiki page (PHP & Lighttpd), typical result across multiple runs:
The saving grace with N2800 is that it has 2 cores and HT on top, so if you have multiple visitors accessing your website, those can be handled in parallel, even if each single request is handled slower.
The reason for faster single-core could be that Nano is an Out-of-order execution CPU (and generally does a whole ton of advanced stuff), while Atom N2800 is a much simpler In-order one "without any instruction reordering, speculative execution or register renaming.".
is there any proper benchmark?
Thanks @rm_, so my findings are not completely off then and somewhat to be expected .
I find it rather impressive that VIA is able to launch a competitive processor in this day and age given the market cap of Intel (and to a lesser extend AMD).
Via Nano has been launched in 2008. (Atom N2800 in December 2011)
Off topic: I actually thought you were talking about the text editors Nano and Atom for some reason.
As you've found out, not necessarily. It comes down to how the chip is designed, and the IPC of the core.
The VIA Nano should be a full OOO superscaler core more comparable to Intel's and AMD's mainstream cores instead of their in-order mobile Atom cores. It was a modern, low-power x86 chip targeting the embedded market rather then a Intel's take on an ARM clone, which was the appeal of them.
At some point Intel switched the Atom cores to OOO cores as well, but I don't remember exactly when that happened. It might have been just recently with the 3000 series. I definitely know those aren't in-order anymore.
Too bad people could never buy the VIA Nanos. I really wanted one at the time.
I did, yes. My initial assumption was that the Atom would be "somewhat" faster but that seems to apply only to multi-core tasks. An untar, for example, completed faster than on the on the Nano. Well, learned something new