[peller]

I'm just speculating here, but if I remember correctly, PHP5 uses significantly more memory than PHP7, and the E5 has a 2.5x larger L3 cache and almost twice the memory bandwidth of the E3. Perhaps that has something to do with it?

[erichileman]

We thought that as well. The E5 has 4 memory channels max bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The E3 has 2 memory channels max bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

But we see a dramatic difference in single core tests. Our virtual machines have 2 cores assigned and there's also a dramatic difference. I wouldn't think that 1-2 cores would saturate 2 memory channels nor 34.1 GB/s bandwidth. If we were testing all 8 cores on the E3 vs E5 8 core virtual machine, yeah maybe, but 1-2 cores?

The L3 cache is much larger on the E5 at 20MB Smartcache vs the E3 at 8MB Smartcache. That seems to be the more likely suspect but I don't know enough about how the cpu cache is used in relation to php to say for sure. Hopefully, someone else does :)

Ref: http://ark.intel.com/products/88176/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-... http://ark.intel.com/products/64590/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-...

[rektide]

You have talked about everything but what the parent was mentioning- actual cache. As in, L1 and L2. Those vary sizably among the different price tiers, somewhat understably, for reasons related to this.

On recent IBM Power chips, there's a so called PowerCore option that turns off half the cores, and lets the remaining cores double their L2. On some workloads that's a net win. I also tend to think it's there for those people paying a pricey per-core or per-socket fee, where a modest 15% performance gain/core could be very rewarding in a way that scale-out/more-cores can't replicate, but that's in a different realm than anyone I know.

[erichileman]

See the other comment above re: perf stat. Working on the event descriptors to see and confirm the l1/l2 cache hits/misses.