What Makes Server Cpu's Superior To Desktop Cpu's- Woodcrest Vs Conroe, Etc
Aug 14, 2007
wondering in general and specifically for woodcrest vs conroe and kentsfield vs clovertown
I can't find either
a) an explanation as to why the server cpu's are superior to the desktop equivilents
or
b) benchmarks comparing them.
even mainstream hardware sites like tomshardware has benchmarks for server hdd's, but not server cpu's for some reason.
apart from the ability to use dual cpu's in a single machine, what is the advantage? what warrants the price difference? are there benchmarks available anywhere to compare comparable models? (example, woodcrest xeon 5150 2.66ghz vs conroe c2d e6700 2.66ghz)
I have make an argument for going with Intel chips for some new platforms. These will be used in Xen VPS hosting.
Scanning thru the products of newegg for example, it would seem first that AMD boards (Opterons) are cheaper then Intel's 775 boards. Then the Intel boards also require FB-Dimms which is a bit more expensive then Registered ram.
I know alot of hosters here prefer going with Intel. Is there any other reasons then just following the crowd? I do know Intel chips perform better but does that warrant say 300 more dollars of going with an Intel based solution?
What would be some convincing arguments for going with Intel instead of AMD chips?
Many people have some problems with vmware server on some 64bit operation systems. If your server's ram is more than 6GB, you have to have a 64bit OS but I have tried to install vmware server on a 64bit server, it seems to be crashing my vmware server every 5 min and I cant use it more until I reset this service.
i have a site which involves heavy cpu use but its in a small private network with 3 other boxes which are pretty much idle, so im wondering is their a way to use the idle cpu time /ram possibly on my main server via the network ?
Are there particular version of mysql or apache that are best suited when you want to utilize a multi-core/multi-cpu system? For example, we are currently using apache 1.3 and am not sure if it has the inherent ability to use multiple cpus to its benefit.
Or would the fact that it spawns child processes take advantage as the processes will be spawned on the different CPUs?
"The Register reports that the world of current multi-core central processing units (CPUs) just entered is facing a serious threat. A security researcher at Cambridge disclosed a new class of vulnerabilities that takes advantage of concurrency to bypass security protections such as anti-virus software The attack is based on the assumption that the software that interacts with the kernel can be used without interference. The researcher, Robert Watson, showed that a careful written exploit can attack in the little timeframe when this happens, and literally change the "words" that they are exchanging. Even if some of these dark aspects of concurrency were already known, Watson proved that real attacks can be developed, and showed that developers have to fix their code. Fast..."
Hey, I'd be interested to hear a bit about the dedicated server features that would "turn you on" as potiential dedicated server client. What would make you go "WOW, thats cool", which features that would be indifferent to you and which ones you'd rather be with out...and why?
Thanks a lot for your input. I've listed a few options, but please feel free to post more below!
(also, just to make it clear, we (uk2group.com) does not offer all of these services, so this is not a lame attempt to spam or promote our services...)
what motherboard do you use for Intel or AMD? looking for mobo that come with 4 RAM slot and at least allow 4 GB of RAM. What case do you use? I thinking of going with 2U case and what (Intel and AMD) CPU do you think is the most stable and more bang for the buck.
Im thinking about make littel upgrade. At this time I have Intel Xeon Dual CPU Dual Core Woodcrest 5160 3.0GHz w/4MB L2 cache and I wolud like to change them to: Dual Xeon E5405 Quad Core (Harpertown). The price and other server parameters are almoust the same. When I change server I will be have better performance?
server is all decided on. Now the processors are my last choice before picking a colo.
But the processors are confusing. There are other posts on here talking about the Dempsey, Woodcrest and the Clovertown. The research I have done on this has told me to stay away from the Dempsey. So not I need to decide between the Woodcrest 5150 (2x 2.0G) and the Clovertown E5320 (4x 1.86G).
Can someone shed some light on this two and explain in plain English which one would be the better of the two? I have read where some people say the Woodcrest would be the better choice and others say the Clovertown would be the better choice. We know the Clovertown has 4 cores and the Woodcrest has 2 cores.
Could someone explain which would be the better choice and why that would be the better choice?
Just saying it had 4 cores does not always mean it is better from what I haver read.
Also, I heard that Apache is capable of taking advantage of multi-core processors (such as the dual proc quad core Clovertown) but that cPanel does not compile Apache in a correct way for it to function properly (efficient) on such machines. Is this true? Can this be solved? Does this mean I have to compile Apache manually?
I am hoping to find a dedicated server with the following specs or similar...
Processor: 3.00GHz or 1.8GHz Dual Core RAM: 1-3GB Hard Drive: 20-50GB (Yes, I realize most dedicated servers don't have drives this small.) Windows preferable Remote Desktop Access 30 GB Bandwidth
I plan to use this for running autoclickers and that sort of thing so that I don't need to worry about them on my PC. If anyone has any suggestions, please let me know! I realize this is an odd request.
to install a server for data sharing. My user want a Windows server with remote desktop to write, edit and share document.
The server will host 5 users. one admin and 4 users. each user will have there own account and folder. The user will update word files and save it directly on the server. The admin will have access to each directory (like a fileserver).
I want your recommandation for the share, the OS and the upgradability
What is the advantages of using a Server MB over Desktop MB? Letz compare Intel Entry Board S3000AH with Intel P4D 3.0 with Intel Desktop Board with P4D 3.0. Both will be using DDR2 desktop RAMs.
I understand that the woodcrest is a better processor. Just want people's opinions if it justifies the price.
Here are the configurations we are looking at:
Dual Xeon 3.2 SCSI 2GB of RAM 2 x 73GB SCSI Disk Cpanel ----------------------------- $222
or
Dual Intel Woodcrest 5130 Dual Core 4GB of RAM 2 x 146GB, 10K RPM SCSI cpanel ----------------------------- $385.00
We host approx 100 sites on a server. 60% are static sites and 40% are ecommerce or sites with a database. Just curious if the performance increase will justify the price on the woodcrest vs the xeon.
I was talking to a friend tonight and he mentioned that CentOS 32 bit may not support dual Woodcrest 5150 2.66GHZ chips.
I was wondering if there is anyone out there that is using CentOS 32 bit version and is running with 2x Woodcrest 5150 chips or even one of them. I would like to put this myth to rest (I hope) before I have CentOS installed on my server.
I am having a VPS and tried to use RDC from home and it i working. But from my office I couldn't since it looks like RDC is blocked when connecting to out of LAN.
I have tried with the support to change the ports couple of times but still didn't work.
I tried: GoToMyPC, IRemotePC etc. But I believe these 3rd part software doesn’t work in Windows 2003 Server.
how to overcome RDC problem or web service or web service that can work on Windows 2003 Server for RDC?
Its been asked many times, please help me decide a new server and we'll keep this topic limited between only 3 configs in question.
I've been using 2 dedicated servers 2.8Ghz dual xeon.
Now its time for a new one. Iam going with Softlayer this time and need your kind suggestion for which of these can handle a good amount of shared hosting traffic.
A).Dual Processor Single Core Xeon - 3.00GHz (Irwindale) - 2 x 2MB cache - HT Second Processor Single Core Xeon - 3.00GHz (Irwindale) - 2 x 2MB cache - HT second_processor
When it comes to CPUs I am pretty clueless, so excuse any silly comments here.
I am little confused by the performance benefits vs price of quad core and duale core processors. I am hoping some of you experts can clarify this for me.
For example, on newegg they have the following:
Intel Xeon 5160 Woodcrest 3.0GHz for $877
and the
Intel Xeon E5345 Clovertown 2.33GHz for $879
Now though the Clovertown has a lower processing speed, I get to run 4 processes simultaneously and have an aggregate total processing power of 9.32 ghz.
On the other hand, the Woodcrest proc allows me to run 2 processes simultaneously and I have an aggregate total processing power of 6 ghz.
Now I am probably reading this wrong, but why would you purchase the woodcrest when the price is essentially the same and benefits are much greater?
On a last note, do programs such as mysql and apache 1.3 take advantage of the multiprocessors?
Apart from being free, of course. I can see thousands of free webhosts, many of which even don't put ads, and still support Databases, custom domains, even unbelievable bandwidths. Still, how does premium webhosts remain at the top? Or what is the problem with these free hosts?
I'd like to get some feedback on what makes people sign up with a provider. On the flip side, what turns you away from a provider? Their site, feedback etc?
Personally, I like to see a provider that has reliability, stability and excellent customer care.
I got a cPanel notification that one of my client's had exceeded their bandwidth and so the site was down.
Checking, I found in AWStats that nearly 400+ MB was web traffic. It looks normal to me. However, AWStats simply grouped them all together under 'Others' without providing clear details.
Is there any other way I can find out what made up that 400+MB traffic?
