Darren S
ClioSport Club Member
.....that quad CPU with dual core support would be more powerful than dual CPU with quad core support?
Ponder, ponder...
D.
Ponder, ponder...
D.
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
8 cores in a server? Am I correct in saying....
- Thread starter Darren S
- Start date
i believe the dual core is currently faster than the quad core.
4 way dual core processors like intel Xeon 7100 series and the AMD Opteron 8200 series are designed for databases and thus have masses of cache (up to 16mb per processor for intel) and are VERY fast.
The quad core xeons (AMD currently don't have quad core) are simply 2 dual core squeezed into 1 socket so a bit of a workaround by intel to get the first QC processors onto the market but they aren't 'true' quad core at the minute. Rather than share the cache between the 4 cores they have 2 sets of cache (2 x 4mb) like 2 dc processors joined together would have. A quad core processor is approximately 1.5 times quicker than a dc, but as you can only get 2 x qc in a server that equates to the equivalent of 3 dc processors and you can get 4 x dc processors in something like a HP DL580 server.
Also, you need to look at the type of application you are running and see if it can actually take advantage of that many cores as it is unlikely it will.
The main purpose for them at the moment is for VMware as you can split up the processors and get better use out of virtual machines using SMP and also it keeps licensing costs down.
As SQL is licensed by the processor and 2 x QC machine is 2 processor licenses whereas a 4 x DC processor machine is 4 licenses and when SQL enterprise processor license can cost over 10k a license it can make a massive difference. Also VMware is licensed per 2 physical processors so would also mean less cost.
So they do have their uses, saving money and vmware being two of them but for raw power its still bes to go for 4x DC 7100 processors from intel or 4 x DC 8200 processors form AMD, not much can beat those at the moment!
4 way dual core processors like intel Xeon 7100 series and the AMD Opteron 8200 series are designed for databases and thus have masses of cache (up to 16mb per processor for intel) and are VERY fast.
The quad core xeons (AMD currently don't have quad core) are simply 2 dual core squeezed into 1 socket so a bit of a workaround by intel to get the first QC processors onto the market but they aren't 'true' quad core at the minute. Rather than share the cache between the 4 cores they have 2 sets of cache (2 x 4mb) like 2 dc processors joined together would have. A quad core processor is approximately 1.5 times quicker than a dc, but as you can only get 2 x qc in a server that equates to the equivalent of 3 dc processors and you can get 4 x dc processors in something like a HP DL580 server.
Also, you need to look at the type of application you are running and see if it can actually take advantage of that many cores as it is unlikely it will.
The main purpose for them at the moment is for VMware as you can split up the processors and get better use out of virtual machines using SMP and also it keeps licensing costs down.
As SQL is licensed by the processor and 2 x QC machine is 2 processor licenses whereas a 4 x DC processor machine is 4 licenses and when SQL enterprise processor license can cost over 10k a license it can make a massive difference. Also VMware is licensed per 2 physical processors so would also mean less cost.
So they do have their uses, saving money and vmware being two of them but for raw power its still bes to go for 4x DC 7100 processors from intel or 4 x DC 8200 processors form AMD, not much can beat those at the moment!
Darren S
ClioSport Club Member
Great response there, dk - cheers! :approve:
Tbh, we're looking at adding another PS4 Citrix server to the farm. You're right in saying that most things wouldn't support all those cores, but I was intrigued nonetheless.
We'll probably stick with a dual CPU, dual core machine and stick stacks of memory in it. We then have another requirement for our SQL2005 per-processor licenced machine, but that's a good few months off yet.
D.
Tbh, we're looking at adding another PS4 Citrix server to the farm. You're right in saying that most things wouldn't support all those cores, but I was intrigued nonetheless.
We'll probably stick with a dual CPU, dual core machine and stick stacks of memory in it. We then have another requirement for our SQL2005 per-processor licenced machine, but that's a good few months off yet.
D.
thats unusual, people normally go for the DL380 G5 for SANS as it has 3 PCIe slots then and after 2 HBA's are taken up gives you one spare for an extra nic etc.
The 360 only has 1 x full height and 1 x half height slot so gets filled with the 2 HBA's. HP have only just started supporting 2 HBA's in the 360, it would only support one in the full height slot before even though as the cards ship with full and half height brackets so both would fit. But now suddenly they have started to, so its now an even better option apart from not having an expansion slot free.
I like the little display board that pops out of the front to show which component has failed in the evnt something does.
The 360 only has 1 x full height and 1 x half height slot so gets filled with the 2 HBA's. HP have only just started supporting 2 HBA's in the 360, it would only support one in the full height slot before even though as the cards ship with full and half height brackets so both would fit. But now suddenly they have started to, so its now an even better option apart from not having an expansion slot free.
I like the little display board that pops out of the front to show which component has failed in the evnt something does.
the forum is run on a DL365 AMD box
We just had our first few arrive, tho just Dual Core procs for now and 8 gig of RAM.. to run a new test SAN
Must say I am impressed by HP's newest server kit
