THE SQL Server Blog Spot on the Web

Welcome to - The SQL Server blog spot on the web Sign in | |
in Search

Joe Chang

IBM System x3850 X5 TPC-H Benchmark

IBM just published a TPC-H SF 1000 result for their x3850 X5, 4-way Xeon 7560 system featuring a special MAX5 memory expansion board to support 1.5TB memory. In Dec 2010, IBM also published a TPC-H SF1000 for their Power 780 system, 8-way, quad-core, (4 logical processors per physical core).

The figure table below shows TPC-H SF 1000 results for the 8-way 6-core Opteron 8439 on SQL Server and Sybase, the 16-way quad-core Itanium 9350 on Oracle, the 4-way Xeon 7560 on SQL Server and the 8-way POWER7 on Sybase. On TPC-H Power (single stream), the 4-way Xeon on SQL Server is competitively placed relative to the 16-way Itanium and 8-way POWER7 systems. In other words, an 8-way Xeon might be comparable to the 8-way POWER7. If there is a weak point in SQL Server, it is in the throughput test (multiple concurrent query streams). This aspect is probably something that could be corrected. Unfortunately, it is probably not a priority for the SQL Server team at this time.

TPC-H SF 1000 Results for HP DL785 and Integrity Superdome servers

HP DL785 G6 Opt 8439 48 512 2008 rtm 95,789.1 69,367.6 81,367.6 7
HP DL785 G6 Opt 8439 48 384 Sybase 15.1 108,436.8 96,652.7 102,375.3 7
HP Superdome2 It 9350 64 512 O11g R2 139,181.0 141,188.1 140,181.1 64
IBM x3850 X5 Xeon 7560 32 1536 2008 R2 127,676.1 81,039.6 101,719.3 7
IBM Power 780 POWER 7 32 512 Sybase 15.2 170,206.1 159,463.1 164,747.2 9

Additional details are below. The two IBM results employ SSD storage. The older results are on HDD storage. In addition, the IBM x3850 X5 (with Xeon 7560) system is configured with 1.5TB memory. The total size of the TPC-H SF 1000 database, all tables and indexes, should be 1.4TB. A storage system (7 SSDs) capable of very high IO rates is still required to handle the intense tempdb activity.

SystemDL785 G6DL785 G6 Superdome 2x3850 X5Power 780
Database SQL Server Sybase 15.1 Oracle 11g R2 SQL Server Sybase 15.2
Processor Opteron 8439 Opteron 8439 Itanium 9350 Xeon 7560 POWER7
Sockets-Cores 8 x 6 = 48 8 x 6 = 48 16 x 4 = 64 4 x 8 = 32 8 x 4 = 32
Hyper-Threading no no disabled 2 per 4 per
Frequency 2.8GHz 2.8GHz 1.73GHz 2.26GHz 4.1GHz
Memory 512GB 384GB 512G 1536GB 512GB
Storage Controllers 6 P800 8 x 8Gbps
dual-port FC
48 8Gpbs
dual-port FC
Storage Ext 12 MSA70 4 MSA2324fc 24 MSA2324   4 EXP 12
Data disks 240 HDD 96 HDD 576 HDD 7 SSD 52 SAS SSD
Controller-Disks 3x50, 25, 30, 35 1 per 24 1 per 24    
LUNs-disks 48x5? ? 3 per 6    
OS 2008 R2 EE RHEL 5.3 HP-UX 11 2008 R2 EE RHEL 6
Database 2008 EE Sybase 15.1 Oracle 11g R2 2008 R2 Sybase 15.2

Below are the individual query run times.

TPC-H SF 1000 individual query execution times

Note the wide variation in each query between different systems and database engines. This could reflect differences in any of:
 1) processor and system architecture,
 2) memory versus disk, HDD and SSD
 3) execution plans
 4) the efficiency between component operations (scan, index seek, hash, sort, etc)
and probably other factors as well. It would be interesting to compare the execution plans between different database engines, even to force the SQL Server execution plan to one as close as possible to the plans employed on the other database engines.

The main point of interest is not moderate differences in the overall (geometric mean) performance, but rather the very large differences in certain queries. The long run time for Q18 should probably be investigated.

Another view, the 4-way Xeon 7560 SF 1TB with 1.5TB memory + SSD versus 4-way Xeon SF 3TB with 0.5TB memory & HDD. The number of processors is doubled, but the database is 3 times larger. On this alone, we might expect a 50% difference in query time, with the caveat that there are complications in projecting TPC-H performance at different scale factor. There are also significant differences in the memory-to-data ratio, and storage performance characteristics.

TPC-H individual query execution times for 4-way 1TB and 8-way 3TB

On the 8-way system at SF 3TB, Q18 actually runs faster than on the 4-way system at SF 1TB. But the other larger queries, Q1, 9, and 21, show the expected pattern. Overall, it does appear that the 3TB query run times are on the order of 50% higher.

Published Friday, March 4, 2011 5:04 PM by jchang

Comment Notification

If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here

Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS



ankit said:

This is interesting for me to know after the IBM launching which is to much informative for everyone and this knowledge get all the readers through your blog. Thnaks a lot for provide good informations.

December 14, 2018 10:37 PM

Leave a Comment


About jchang

Reverse engineering the SQL Server Cost Based Optimizer (Query Optimizer), NUMA System Architecture, performance tools developer - SQL ExecStats, mucking with the data distribution statistics histogram - decoding STATS_STREAM, Parallel Execution plans, microprocessors, SSD, HDD, SAN, storage performance, performance modeling and prediction, database architecture, SQL Server engine

This Blog


Privacy Statement