Need Help with server 1 Quad for now, or 2 Dual Cores?

F

fenderltd

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2007
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
2,432
Getting a new server through Dell instead of building it because of the OS cost etc and I figure this beast needs to do some SMP. Do I go with one quad core for now or two Dual Cores? The choices in life.:p What's going to be the best for folding!! hahaha
 
fenderltd said:
Getting a new server through Dell instead of building it because of the OS cost etc and I figure this beast needs to do some SMP. Do I go with one quad core for now or two Dual Cores? The choices in life.:p What's going to be the best for folding!! hahaha
Click to expand...

More cores = PPD bliss ;)

However, it depends on the cost and if you can afford it... Also, MixManSC would be the man to ask since he have a Dell dual cpu server as well.

 
Don't worry about the cost, I am buying it with those Canadian Spy Coins :p :p

I am thinking the 1 quad for now, I don't know if the two quad's would balance any kind of load better than 1 quad

MixManSC give me your input please :)
 
Problem with only going with one processor is you'll only get one hs from Dell. You'll have to order another one from them when you buy your second processor. So, that means you go with two quads from the get go. ;)
 
Couldn't you put any heatsink on? or is proprietary obviously? With 2 quad's would I need a min of 8GB of Ram? Will the OS see both quad's? Using windows 2003 server

Also, on the ram do I want 1GB sticks or 512MB sticks?

Either getting 4 or 8 GB

4GB 667MHz (8x512MB), Single Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs [add $879]
4GB 667MHz (4x1GB), Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs [add $629]

8GB 667MHz (4x2GB), Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs [add $1,449]
8GB 667MHz (8x1GB), Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs [add $1,359]
 
The heatsink is proprietary. You can get a machine with dual, dual core processors now and have the same speed and the bonus of having two heatsinks handy when you later decide to upgrade to dual quad cores. For optimal performance you will want at least 4 dual ranked 667mhz DIMMS. With 4 dual ranked dimms the memory controller will run in quad channel mode and will be fully ready for a 1333mhz FSB speed. You do not need 4GB of ram per processor. It will run just fine with 4GB. I've actually gone through trying a single quad core 2330 and then dual, dual core 2660 processors. FAH SMP gave me better performance with dual, dual cores than with the single quad core although there is a speed difference which may account for that.

I ended up selling the Poweredge 2900 and bought a Precision 690 workstation instead, it uses the same processors, etc just much more desktop friendly with PCIe X16 slots, firewire, etc... I ended up buying it with a single dual core 2660, 2GB of RAM and 1 SAS hard drive. I then bought the second processor, heatsink, 14 more GB of RAM, and 3 more SAS drives on eBay. You will find the parts there but you have to be patient to get them for the right price. Ended up being a lot cheaper than buying the parts from Dell and all of the parts I bought except for the RAM are Dell OEM parts. Because the Precision 690 has 16 dimm slots I ended up just buying all 1GB sticks since they are cheaper than 2GB and 4GB sticks.

As it is now I am hitting about 9 minutes per frame with the SMP client. I'd love to upgrade to dual quad cores but they are just too pricey for me right now. I will be though once I can grab a pair of 2660 of faster quads for under about $700. Then with it be dual SMP clients for over 4000 PPD on a single box. :D
 
you say the dual "dual" cores were faster in smp, but what about 2 quad cores? Will windows server see all 8 cores? 4GB of ram enough for 2 quad cores? lastly, I am going to be running raid 5 on three 500gb drives, no SAS, what are the real benefits of SAS?
I don't need firewire etc. Let me show you the build.

edit - nevermind the sas, I need a min. of 500GB and the SAS is very expensive.
 
PowerEdge 1900:
Quad Core Intel® Xeon® E5320, 2x4MB Cache, 1.86GHz, 1066MHz FSB

Additional Processor:
Quad Core Intel® Xeon® E5320, 2x4MB Cache, 1.86GHz, 1066MHz FSB

Memory:
DISCOUNTED UPGRADE! 4GB 667MHz (4x1GB), Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs 4G4D6D1 [466-0823]

Operating System:
Microsoft® Small Business Server 2003 R2, Standard Edition SBSR2ST [420-6266]

Primary Controller:
FREE UPGRADE to PERC 5/i, Integrated Controller Card PERC5IP [466-4787]

Hard Drive Configuration:
Integrated SAS/SATA RAID 5, PERC 5/i Integrated MSR5C [341-4020]

Primary Hard Drive:
500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive 500S2 [341-3875]

2nd Hard Drive:
500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive 500S2 [341-3875]

3rd Hard Drive:
500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive 500S2 [341-3875]

4th Hard Drive:
500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive 500S2 [341-3875]

Network Card:
Single Embedded Broadcom® NetXtreme II 5708 Gigabit Ethernet NIC OBNIC [430-1764] 13

CD/DVD Drive:
48X IDE CD-RW/DVD ROM Drive CDRWDVD

I don't understand why I cannot choose an 80gb for the primary. I thought the PERC would be a seperate channel with the 3 x 500GB drives in Raid5. When I try this, it says all drives must be the same :confused:

Compatibility Instructions - 1Errors:
The Hard Drive Configuration you selected requires at least three Hard Drives. All Hard Drives must be the same size and speed. All hard drives must be the same size and speed. Please update your selections in one or more of the following: Primary Hard Drive, 2nd Hard Drive, 3rd Hard Drive, 4th Hard Drive, 5th Hard Drive or 6th Hard Drive.
 
Why wouldn't you make an 20-80gb virtual disk for your OS and use the remaining as needed for your data/transaction/etc? 4 drives in raid 5 would be a better choice for your OS anyway, fault tolerance etc. That's how I config my servers, anyway.
 
I wanted the OS to be on a completely seperate drive due to the critical data I am dealing with. I would rather let want the OS to get jacked up by itself than with my data. There is an option to allow a 16 or 20GB partion for windows? So I should use all four 500GB drives in raid 5 with my primary drive with a 20GB partition?
 
caveman-jim said:
Why wouldn't you make an 20-80gb virtual disk for your OS and use the remaining as needed for your data/transaction/etc? 4 drives in raid 5 would be a better choice for your OS anyway, fault tolerance etc. That's how I config my servers, anyway.
Click to expand...

I think you mean creating partitions within the raid 5 array. Just create a C: partition of 30 gigs or so (dell setup cd will do this for you, as will windows install if you don't use the dell cd) and then when windows is finished installing, go into disk management and create another partition(s) using the rest of the disk space.
 
this is what Dell options say

OS Partitions
Partitioning allows you to divide the hard drive into isolated sections. OS partitions are created in order to reduce the risk of unintentionally corrupting system files.WS2003 R2 has a default OS partition size of 12GB and SBS 2003 has a default OS partition size of 20GB.


For the raid 5 to work I need atleast 3 drives, how to I make sure Raid 5 is working? I am going to be on the road a lot and don't have time to mess around with this for a few months, but it is needed now.

Once I format the rest of C: to G: the raid 5 will work with the other 500GB's and the partition G:?

Thanks for the help, I am new to raid :eek:
 
Yes, raid 5 will be setup on the controller independent of the OS, it's setup either in the bios or using the dell setup cd. I'd try to get a bit more the 12 gigs on your C: partition, you could just do the install yourself. It's really simple, pop in the Dell cd, let it boot and follow the setup.
 
The Dell Server Assistant CD can create the virtual disk and set the OS volume size as well. If you have to do it manually because the CD doesn't work with your OS CD, then you use the PERC firmware to create the virtual disk (select your disks, raid level and initialize the array) and then in OS install create your system partition as normal.

And yes, Raid5 requires at least 3 disks.
 
fenderltd said:
you say the dual "dual" cores were faster in smp, but what about 2 quad cores? Will windows server see all 8 cores? 4GB of ram enough for 2 quad cores? lastly, I am going to be running raid 5 on three 500gb drives, no SAS, what are the real benefits of SAS?
I don't need firewire etc. Let me show you the build.

edit - nevermind the sas, I need a min. of 500GB and the SAS is very expensive.
Click to expand...

Yes - Server 2003 will see all 8 cores just fine. It's a standard edition of Server 2003 so it can really only address 4GB of ram no matter what. Anymore than 4GB will be useless unless you load a 64 bit or an Enterprise version of Windows Server.

ND40 already covered much of this. Also - the advantage to SAS is those are "enterprise" class drives. Depending on the drive they are also considerably faster than their SATA counterparts. 15,000 RPM versus 7,200 or 10,000 RPM. SAS drives also are generally rated with a much longer MTBF. But - they do cost a LOT more.

You will be fine on the drives. The RAID is hardware controlled and configured independent of the OS. As far as any operating system is concerned, the OS will just thing you have one big fat drive with which you can create one or more partitions on. When you first run the Server Assistant CD it will ask you how you want the drives configured. Just add all 4 drives as a RAID 5 set. Then when it gets to setting up Windows it will ask how big of a partition you want created for Windows. After Windows is installed used Windows Disk Management to create additional partitions for your data.
 
Use the cd that comes with the server. You literally stick it in, boot from it, it creates whatever RAID/partions etc you ask it to, installs the OS and drivers and you are pretty much done. I installed a dual quad core about 2 weeks ago that took me roughly 3 hours to setup from start to finish (with the exception of setting up users/permissions/datatransfer etc) The Dell install disc really makes setting these up a complete breeze.

As far as the raid part goes it raids the drives not the partions on the drives so you could create 10 partions on the RAID5 drives and all 10 would be under the RAID5 "umbrella" for data security etc.

BTW my dual quad puts out what seems to be ~3800PPD. I always hate to have to pull hardware to replace hardware (especially since the xeon boards are SO expensive so the extra cpus become useless effectively). Dell uses these 8" tall or something ridiculous HS on their CPUs and then a fan ducting system so you will at the very least have to purchase the HS from Dell. You can do this seperately however if you put a second CPU in it from Ebay they WILL bitch moan and complain about it for warranty purposes if you buy the second CPU from Ebay etc.
 
Ok, just pulled the trigger :)

Order Detail



PowerEdge 1900
Quad Core Intel® Xeon® E5345, 2x4MB Cache, 2.33GHz, 1333MHz FSB, Microsoft® Small Business Server 2003 R2, Standard Edition $6,109.00 1 $6,109.00
PowerEdge 1900 Quad Core Intel® Xeon® E5345, 2x4MB Cache, 2.33GHz, 1333MHz FSB

Additional Processor Quad Core Intel® Xeon® E5345, 2x4MB Cache, 2.33GHz, 1333MHz FSB


Memory DISCOUNTED UPGRADE! 4GB 667MHz (4x1GB), Dual Ranked Fully Buffered DIMMs
[466-0823]

Primary Hard Drive 500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive
[341-3875]

Primary Controller FREE UPGRADE to PERC 5/i, Integrated Controller Card
[466-4787]

Operating System Microsoft® Small Business Server 2003 R2, Standard Edition
[420-6266]

2nd Hard Drive 500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive
[341-3875]

Hard Drive Configuration Integrated SAS/SATA RAID 5, PERC 5/i Integrated
[341-4020]

4th Hard Drive 500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive
[341-3875]

3rd Hard Drive 500GB, SATA, 3.5-inch, 7.2K RPM Hard Drive
[341-3875]

Save $1400 on select PowerEdge when priced $4,300 or above! - $1,400.00

Symantec AntiVirus 10.2 Protection - 5 User (AntiVirus/Spyware) $236.00 1 $236.00
Subtotal: $4,945.00
Shipping and Handling: $34.98

Shipping Discount: -$4.99

Sales Tax: $410.45
Total: $5,385.44



 
Nice !!! Run dual SMP clients on that. You should easily add another 4000 PPD with that since you went ahead and jumped in for dual 2.33 quad cores. 18.64Ghz of processing power in one box. :D
 
MixManSC said:
Nice !!! Run dual SMP clients on that. You should easily add another 4000 PPD with that since you went ahead and jumped in for dual 2.33 quad cores. 18.64Ghz of processing power in one box. :D
Click to expand...

I'm so excited!!!! I just can't hide it!:eek: :D
 
If your so worried about OS costs why not just install a linux distro. It will support 16+ cpus and a lot of memory in 64bit. I've got 64bit Ubuntu installed on a PD 805 system I use for an extra folding box and it works GREAT!
 
loxety said:
If your so worried about OS costs why not just install a linux distro. It will support 16+ cpus and a lot of memory in 64bit. I've got 64bit Ubuntu installed on a PD 805 system I use for an extra folding box and it works GREAT!
Click to expand...

I am not SO Worried about OS cost, the money is not coming out of my pocket. This machine is going to a windows "part of town" at my office so a linux distro is not going to work. I have been using Linux for quite sometime off and on since 99'. Thank's for the tip though, it just doesn't work this time:p
 
so how is your new baby?

out of diapers yet?

;)

are you ready to overtake Xilikon?



 
Pocatello said:
so how is your new baby?

out of diapers yet?

;)

are you ready to overtake Xilikon?



Click to expand...

Overtaking me is now hard since I have a 30,000 points lead :) With my 10k ppd average, it need a hell of a powerhouse to catch me. I also ordered a E6420 to replace my E4300 so I could see a improvement in PPD.
 
fenderltd said:
I am not SO Worried about OS cost, the money is not coming out of my pocket. This machine is going to a windows "part of town" at my office so a linux distro is not going to work. I have been using Linux for quite sometime off and on since 99'. Thank's for the tip though, it just doesn't work this time:p
Click to expand...

I either hope you arent worried about OS costs or you won't have more than 5 clients attached to the server as the client licenses for SBS are just crazy expensive. I have always waitied till Dell did the 40% off a server and then just buy that JUST to ge the liscenses at 40% off which made them about on par with 2003 Standard client licenses. $100 a user is a killer
 
Tormond said:
I either hope you arent worried about OS costs or you won't have more than 5 clients attached to the server as the client licenses for SBS are just crazy expensive. I have always waitied till Dell did the 40% off a server and then just buy that JUST to ge the liscenses at 40% off which made them about on par with 2003 Standard client licenses. $100 a user is a killer
Click to expand...

Can't you just volume license it with software assurance when you start to get large? I mean, 5-25 cals, sure, but after that, might as well volume license everything...wonder where the breakeven/switchover point is.
 
Well SBS only allows 75 client licenses ever (which is one downside of SBS is that you can't scale beyond 75 users) The breakeven point on licensing costs (depending on what parts of SBS you utilize) is about 14 users. If you use Exchange, SQL, and ISA server parts of SBS then it gets to be around 26 or so users before it becomes more expensive to use SBS. The real bitch part is that it HAS to be the primary domain controller (the SBS server) and if you ever need to switch then all your licensing costs dont transfer (ie if you go to Longhorn and get that but decide to use exchange 2003 then you have to buy all new licenses for everything.

Volume licensing for SBS are roughly the exact same price as they would be to buy them OEM or through Dell etc. You might save $2-5 per liscense but thats about it. The only upside to going Software assurance right now is that you know that Longhorn is coming out so it MIGHT be a viable solution to SA it at this point. SA isn't the same pricing as standard volume licensing so you may bery well end up spending more for VL and SA if you decide not to go to LOnghorn immediatly (or wait a year at which point your SA may be useless). I have found SA to almost never be a good deal unless you have to have licenses RIGHT now and KNOW that you are going to the new version AND know that a new version is coming before your SA runs out.

Quick Edit: I just realized that I have spent WAY to much time doing the math on Microsoft licensing in the past :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top