Channel 9 Forums - Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

MetaGunny — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:51:24 GMT

I went to price a 1U server at Dell and the price seemed outrageous, about 6K. However, it could be because I don't understand the CPU part as much as I should.

I priced a server with two cpu's (each dual core). However, is that really needed or is a single chip dual core the equivalent of a two cpu server before? (Essentially, was I pricing a real 4 way server?)

Basically, my question is, would a single chip with dual core be about the same performance or more as an older xeon single core dual cpu server?

I understand that the server I need depends on many things, my workload, what I'm using it for, etc. However, like I said, I thought I would want at least a dual cpu server.

I bought my own personal workstation for around 3,500 a couple of years ago with a dual cpu xeon server with hyperthreading that shows as 4 CPU's, at 2GHZ. I think these were 2.33 ghz.

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

AndyC — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:36:13 GMT

Dual core is, effectively, the same as 2 processors (albeit cheaper from a Windows license POV), so yes, you'd spec'd a 4-way box.

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

MetaGunny — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:47:06 GMT

Thanks Andy.

So if I buy the single cpu dual core, I should get at least the same or better performance than a dual cpu, right?

Also, will it show two CPU's in task manager or one?

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

JonathonW — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:10:40 GMT

MetaGunny wrote:

Thanks Andy.

So if I buy the single cpu dual core, I should get at least the same or better performance than a dual cpu, right?

Also, will it show two CPU's in task manager or one?

1) Yes (unless the dual CPU were both dual core)

2) Two

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

PerfectPhase — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:14:36 GMT

MetaGunny wrote:

Thanks Andy.

So if I buy the single cpu dual core, I should get at least the same or better performance than a dual cpu, right?

Also, will it show two CPU's in task manager or one?

The best way to think of dual core is Intel/AMD have taken to seperate chips and squezed them into one package. So yes, dual core is almost idendical to two seperate single core chips.

A basic dual core 1U server from dell should be in the <£1K range.

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

kriskdf — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 03:03:51 GMT

CannotResolveSymbol wrote:

MetaGunny wrote: Thanks Andy.

So if I buy the single cpu dual core, I should get at least the same or better performance than a dual cpu, right?

Also, will it show two CPU's in task manager or one?

1) Yes (unless the dual CPU were both dual core)

2) Two

I don't think this is totally true. I think the cores share cache or bus or something. There could be contention for anything that the cores share. I'd double check. Two cores should be better than one, but not equivelant to dual cpu.

Tech Off - Dual CPU Server Needed? Seems to Expensive

AndyC — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 04:28:26 GMT

kriskdf wrote:

I don't think this is totally true. I think the cores share cache or bus or something. There could be contention for anything that the cores share. I'd double check. Two cores should be better than one, but not equivelant to dual cpu.

I've found the difference to be marginal at best. YMMV, naturally.