The the provider we're considering is offering a range of processors at different price points including:
single Xeon 5110 (dual core) with 2GB memory,
single Xeon X3220 (quad) 2GB,
dual Intel Xeon 5100 with 2GB,
dual Xenon 5310 (quads) with 4GB.
quad core processor vs Intel Xeon 3060 Dual Core Conroe Processor which is better any why?
View 2 Replies View Relatedif im going to open a web hosting business, which processor works best for a server, AMD or Intel?
View 12 Replies View RelatedIntel Dual Quad Core Harpertown Or Core i7?
What would be better for a dedicated server?
I have a dual processor server and today I was monitoring CPU usage using the ‘top’ command
There was a mysql process I was tweaking around with where the CPU % kept jumping over 100%.. It went up to 155%, 175%, 180% on numerous occasions.
My question is on a dual processor machine does ‘top’ measure CPU usage between 0% and 200% or does the usages I saw earlier mean my server was getting REALLY overloaded?
Can anyone recommend a good 1U server chassis that is $100 or under?
Preferrably one already with a good/reliable power supply in it. Just something that will handle PentiumD or Athlon AM2 stuff & 2 hard drives.
I am trying to decide to run my heavy database community site over at a new host but am looking to create a good package customed for high bandwidth.
I can decide from going with ONE Dual Quad-Core 2.0 Processor(4 gigs of ram) or TWO Intel Xeon 3210 2.1 GHz Quad Core Processor servers(4 gigs of ram each) with a Virtual Rack Container.
With having both the lower servers on the virtual rack, will the site manage with the same power as the Dual Quad Core since it is on a rack?
which processor for an high traffic server?
DELL Xeon 3065 or Intel Dual Core E 2140
I need a good and fast company that are experienced in Linux servers to secure my server, can you recommend anyone?
View 0 Replies View Relateda good deal of the price in buying servers frequently comes from a nice motherboard, chassis, etc. having to purchase those items twice is just taking away from other components you could be adding to one server-- more ram, more/faster cpu's, etc. not to mention the wasted overhead in just running the operating system twice.
considering all of those factors, wouldn't it be logical to build a nicer single server rather than two "okay" servers?
the only real advantages I see are
1) potentially httpd could be reachable when mysql isn't... but for something like vb, that's almost a moot point
2) at some point you're going to hit a point where buying a nicer CPU isn't really worth the money; spending twice the money for a 10% performance increase, etc. but it seems like multiple cpu's could still get around that.
If you have experience with large mysql databases please share your thoughts about a new MySQL server. If all other parameters are the same, what is better for a 6-10 GB MySQL db, dedicated server?
Dual XEON or Dual Opteron 2212 Dual Core Processor?
Also, any advice on suggested RAM, partitioning, OS, etc. are welcome. Current MySQL version used is 4.1.21.
I am using epicvps right now. But it has been baught by vaserv days before. Where it came a lot server downtime and server problems. My storage will automaticly decrease. I send tickets to them many times, they just respond me that the nod that where i host have too much vps on it. They tell me that they will move my account to new nod. But it still happen again today!
My budget is something around $50 per month, can anyone recommend some reliable company?
In Terms of server speed, reliability, load handling, mysql database handling and other aspects which is better processor with same RAM config..
Processor 1 : P4 3Ghz Dual Core
Processor 2 : Intel Celeron-L Conroe 1.6 Ghz
OR
Processor 3 :Celeron Dual Core E1200's
I have always used Intel processors. Maybe just out of habit but I always have.
AMD Dual-Core Opeteron 1216 2.40GHz
or
Intel Quad-Core Xeon 2.50GHz 2.66GHz
Both would have 4GB ram.
What is the actual performance differences between these two processors? The Intel is $80 more and just not sure if it really is worth it.
Hows everybody doing. I am hosting a small network of sites (between 5-10) on a dedicated server with HostGator. I have the Standard package which gives me 1024mb as far as RAM and a Dual-Core 3040 Xeon (Conroe) as a processor goes.
My sites run extremely slow on the front end and back end. The sites are blogs which you probably know are php heavy. Not to mention a few of the sites get a decent amount of traffic (Alexa rankings of around 50K). One of the less popular sites with not as much traffic is www(dot)abnormalstyle(dot)com ...You can see how slow this site loads, its on the same server as the other sites, just using a different IP account...
I am looking to upgrade my server. When i talked to HostGator support i got the answer i would expect. "Upgrade to the next package, which is more money".
I am wondering if i would advantage from just upgrading my ram, or going with a processor first. The thing is, if i want to get the next processor i have to defiantly go with the next HostGator package, due to the fact they cant just add a new processor. They can however add more Ram.
Below are some options, if you have the time feel free to leave your comments and pick one of the options below which you feel would best suit the network of Wordpress blog sites i am using.
---------------------------------------------------------
Option 1 - Just upgrade RAM. There is no sense in going from a Dual-Core 3040 Xeon (Conroe) processor to just a Quad-Core 3210 Xeon (Kentsfield) processor, regardless of the ram, it will not make a major difference. ITS ALL ABOUT RAM!
Option 2 - Go for the next HostGator package which offers 4096mb Ram wise and Quad-Core 3210 Xeon (Kentsfield) processor wise. The Processor upgrade along with the RAM upgrade will be MUCH BETTER then just the ram upgrade itself in option 1.
Twice in two years now, as a very responsible host with ZERO tolerance to spam (incoming or outgoing!), I have been hampered by the efforts of the anti-spam "reputation service" offered by [url]
We host something like 2000 websites across a cluster of servers, and while we do everything possible to prevent spam, it's inevitable there will be the occasional outbreak.
A couple of days back, sure enough, one of our hosted sites was compromised. As far as I could tell, the culprit was too simple a password. There were no signs of compromised scripts, permissions, anything. Just a spam script uploaded via FTP from a foreign IP address. We do have limits on password strength now, but may not have when this account was set up.
Anyhow, within 120 minutes or so, we had removed the spam script, blocked the offending IP, secured the site and delisted our IP from the ONE RBL it appeared on - Spamcop.
You would think that would be the end of the story, right? Wrong.
Here we are, over two days later, NO listings on any RBLs, NO further spam from ANY of our servers. What Senderbase reputation do you think that server has? Poor.
This is an IP that as far as I know has NEVER had a spam issue, other than the single outbreak two days ago.
The net result of this "Poor" listing is that we have now had outgoing email sitting in our mail queue for 50+ hours because the recipient mail systems are STILL blocking us based on our "Poor" reputation.
Furthermore, I quote directly from the Senderbase site: "Why is the reputation Poor? This host is sending spam!". That one really tipped me over the edge.
As I say, this is at least the second time two years running that this has happened to us. Single spam problem; Cleaned up quickly and efficiently; Wait on Senderbase for days.
It is hard enough dealing with spammers and problems like this, without having to fight the "good guys" too. All I can say is that I will personally NEVER use, nor recommend, the services of Senderbase or Ironport.
I am currently with Lunarpages. Up until a few months ago I was on a regular plan (not VPS). Their service and uptime was great. But they moved me to a VPS due to the traffic which I completely understand. However, since I have been moved to their VPS servers the downtime has been horrible. And by horrible I mean horrible! So I am on the hunt for a new web hosting company.
I really do not know what I need, I believe I do need VPS hosting though. The bad news is that I know nothing about VPS hosting. Lunarpages has me on Plesk now and I could not be more lost with it.
My main dilemma is that I have a php forum that generates a good amount of traffic. I am getting about 40,000 page views per day on the forum and about 6,000 page views per day on the main website portion.
I am scared to death to move the forum. I fear I will need a tech friendly host to help me set the forum back up. Once I am back up and running I never need any help. I just want to get to that point again.
But I have questions, like what the heck is "Guaranteed RAM"? Is that important to me? Could this be part of the reason that now that LP has moved me to their VPS servers that I can no longer just simply download my large database for the forum through phpMyAdmin? It just craps out and LP told me something like VPS servers didn't have enough memory (or was it RAM?) to preform the task?
So far I am hating my VPS experience. I just want to be up and running smooth again without fearing the downtime.
I think LP's hosting for the VPS is around $45.00 per month or so/ I would like to be lower if possible, but I do not want to get a new host with the same downtime issues.
After reading a lot of good reviews on Softlayer around here, I was thinking about switching to them. They have some really good deals and I'm planning on getting one of their dual opterons, but I have a question about the processor speed in relation to database intense stuff (like a forum with a good number of users on at once, or a CMS).
I have the option of either going for a Dual Opteron 248 (2.2 gHz) or a 252 (2.6 gHz) which costs $50 more. My question: is the 252 really worth the extra money compared to the 248? All I have on my server is an IPB forum with 100-450+ users on at any given time, and a static site (soon to be converted to a CMS), and I'm thinking that RAM is more important than the processor for a database app like those (that, and hard drive speed). So I wanted to know if it would be better to go with the 248 and spend the money on more Ram and a SA SCSI 10k drive or two?
I have a production windows 2003 server with 2 XEON processors. In task manager I see 4 processors: 0,1,2,3. I assume this is because these processors have hyperthreading. My question is how do I know which 2 of the 4 are the main processors. I have a service I only want to run on processor 2, which 2 would I select to do this? I really don't want to be experimenting as this is a live production server.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a single Intel Xeon Processor and already found a same stepping code Xeon processor to upgrade.
I'm running CentOS 4.4. If I add the 2nd processor, do I need to configure anything on the system.
I bought a new Forum Script but I cannot install it on my GoDaddy web hosting because my script has two Requirements for installing, listed below:
1- Web server with PHP 5-support
2- Apache 2 with PHP 5.2.x-module recommended
My question is, if you know any web hosting that support those two things?
I'm in the process of looking at a new firewall... What we need in a firewall:
- Deep packet inspection
- BGP Routing (just for active/passive uplink failover)
- support for up to 150 Mbps+
- Gbit uplinks
- Active/Active setup for firewalls
- Budget around 3k Each firewall
Possible choices:
- Juniper Netscreen 140 SSG
- SonicWALL® PRO 4060
So far I'm really leaning towards the Juniper NetScreen 140 SSG.
My network consultant started to recommend SonicWall but from previous reviews here and else where kinda turned me off them.
Anyone has an opinion about the following processor:
CPU Intel Xeon Quad Core 3210
I have a dedicated server running Linux CentsOS.
The default setup of my file system is:
/dev/sda1 450GB
tmpfs 2GB
/usr/tmpDSK 485 MB
My Disk size is 500GB
Planning on getting a new dedicated server with 4GB RAM, and a 500GB 7.2k SATA2 Hard Drive.
Which processor do you guys suggest? I know the Q6600 is older and runs hotter, but it has better specs than the Q8200. Would I really notice a difference if I'm only hosting static sites without any video streaming or anything?
I have the following cpu:
Dell PowerEdge R300 1U Server
1 x QuadCore Intel Xeon X5460 3.16 GHz Processor
8GB RAM ( 4x2 GB DIMMs )
2 x 500 GB SATA II Drives
OS: CentOS 5 64bit
I would like to run this as a virtualization instance for my clients ( 3-4 max. on this box depending on their needs ). I need a provider that can get me the following:
3-4 TB of bandwidth depending on need ( 100 Mbps preferred )
Windows Server OS's / licenses to install as needed
cPanel licenses to install as needed
Which providers can meet these requirements? Which do you recommend for value, support, and network?
I currently have 2 proxies with over 2500+ uniques a day.
I need a dedicated server, anyone got any suggestions?
while I'm surfing the net i find this site where it has a price list for the parts of a computer and i saw an Intel Xeon processor and it's priced is affordable to me.. Hmm.. My question now is it Ok to buy this processor? because some of my I.T. friends here tell me that it is for Server based processor only and it is not suitable for PC HOME USER..
View 2 Replies View RelatedThis is a long review, but I think it has to be so long.
I’m using DNS Made Easy and on the left side of the main menu I saw a ad for [url]. It’s the same company that owns DNS Made Easy that owns VPSit.com
I did sign up for a Windows VPS with 25 GB of storage, 384 MB of RAM, 700 GB of DDoS protected bandwidth and Plesk 30 domains. The price was little high, but not a big problem: $38.95/mo
At first I was amazed about the speed of their VPS setup. It was instant, and I got my VPS up and running within 5 minutes from I made the payment.
The speed of the VPS was also VERY fast. When I looked at what hardware I got on my VPS I saw that they “only” used a Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.0 Ghz CPU.
But that was OK since the VPS was lightning fast.
I uploaded my websites (a live backup of my main VPS) and did not take any more action, since the VPS is only used when my main VPS is down.
Before I tell you about the main problem I have to say that VPSit.com do not offer any option for managed/unmanaged VPS plans. And since they have no option for managed plan, or no information about their VPS's are unmanaged I assumed that the VPS was managed. They also write this on their info page: ....
I want to use CentOS 4+ hosting.
The data center should be in USA,UK,Canada,Australia,france,German,and India.
I'm about to put my site online, firstly so that I can post links which will quickly summarize problems that I'm having, and secondly so that, of course, people will visit the site
What hosting providers can you recommend?
I'm looking for a service provider that is robust (will not go down), scalable (will handle large amounts of bandwidth), supports shttp, and will provide authenticity certificates.