Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1

    Dual core Opterons and SQL Server Licensing cost

    Hi all

    I have just skimmed the review at:-

    The Tech Report for Dual Core Opterons

    Do Dual core Opteron's really outperform Dual Xeon 3.4's in some departments?

    This is really great news if it is true, because Microsoft has still apparently has kept the "per-processor" license for SQL Server. So you could just get a dual-core processor, and just one processor license for SQL Server because it is treated as just one processor.

    Has anyone any experience of using SQL Server 2000 with a Dual core processor - will it naturally take advantage of the dual core?

    Best wishes
    Tryfon

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    4,612

    Re: Dual core Opterons and SQL Server Licensing cost

    Originally posted by Tryf
    Hi all

    I have just skimmed the review at:-

    The Tech Report for Dual Core Opterons

    Do Dual core Opteron's really outperform Dual Xeon 3.4's in some departments?

    This is really great news if it is true, because Microsoft has still apparently has kept the "per-processor" license for SQL Server. So you could just get a dual-core processor, and just one processor license for SQL Server because it is treated as just one processor.

    Has anyone any experience of using SQL Server 2000 with a Dual core processor - will it naturally take advantage of the dual core?

    Best wishes
    Tryfon
    A dual core Opteron will beat a dual Xeon system in quite a few areas, yes. However, you may want to double-check with Microsoft on the licensing, as I was under the impression that dual-core processors would be billed as 2 CPUs.
    Scott Burns, President
    BQ Internet Corporation
    Remote Rsync and FTP backup solutions
    *** http://www.bqbackup.com/ ***

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    69

    Re: Re: Dual core Opterons and SQL Server Licensing cost

    Originally posted by bqinternet
    A dual core Opteron will beat a dual Xeon system in quite a few areas, yes. However, you may want to double-check with Microsoft on the licensing, as I was under the impression that dual-core processors would be billed as 2 CPUs.
    http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/h...multicore.mspx
    Hudson Digital - Dedicated Hosting Solutions
    Enterprise-Class Dual XEON/OPTERON Servers!
    http://www.hudsondigital.net

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    984
    I believe Oracle has been the only major company to state they'd charge per Core (as if their regular pricing wasn't high enough already).

    Microsoft already stated quite awhile ago that they'd only charge per Processor. So it will be a nice break to be able to buy a single CPU license with a Dual Core providing the performance is up to par, as the MSSQL 2000 licensing is hardly cheap.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Helmond
    Posts
    40
    Hi Tryf,

    No Experience yet, My blade server with dual Opterons will come within one week. But the Opteron processor will outperform the intel XEON precessors. Since Service Pack 4 of SQL server it's 64Bits! And if you use Windows 2003 server (64 bits edition) it will scream for work!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    69

    *

    Originally posted by Planpro

    Since Service Pack 4 of SQL server it's 64Bits! And if you use Windows 2003 server (64 bits edition) it will scream for work!
    Planpro, don't get too excited just yet. SQL Server 2000 (64 bit) only supports Itanium. And, SQL Server 2000 SP4 lets you run 32 bit SQL server on Windows 2003 server (64 bit) through WOW emulation. So, you'll need to wait 'till Q4 with the release of SQL Server 2005 (64 bit) with AMD64 support.
    Hudson Digital - Dedicated Hosting Solutions
    Enterprise-Class Dual XEON/OPTERON Servers!
    http://www.hudsondigital.net

  7. #7
    Originally posted by Hudson Digital
    Planpro, don't get too excited just yet. SQL Server 2000 (64 bit) only supports Itanium. And, SQL Server 2000 SP4 lets you run 32 bit SQL server on Windows 2003 server (64 bit) through WOW emulation. So, you'll need to wait 'till Q4 with the release of SQL Server 2005 (64 bit) with AMD64 support.
    Hi there

    Please could you clarify : Will the bog standard version of SQL Server 2000 ("Standard" edition) work at all with Dual core processors?!

    And would it run any faster when it is on a Dual core top of the range processor. Currently I have a database server with just a single Pentium 3.4 processor, and was wondering if I could just have a new machine built with a top of the range Athlon dual core, but use the Standard SQL Server 2000.

    Is it definitely best to wait for SQL Server 2005 Standard edition?!

    Best wishes
    Tryfon

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    I went to the AMD/Microsoft Tech Tour last week. Microsoft said the per CPU license is per working/installed socket. Single or dual core does not matter, nor are you charged if there is no processor in the socket.

    As far as the SQL, they were pretty clear that it's going to be some time before there is significant code improvement to see any major changes in how well SQL performs on the dual core servers.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,556
    I went to that in Dallas yesterday... Was pretty interesting, unfortunately I didn't get any of the bundles as they were sold out.. I guess we'll get a second chance though!
    James Lumby

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    542

    Re: Dual core Opterons and SQL Server Licensing cost

    Ah, but what about dual Xeons with dual core chips?  (that's 4 virtual processors instead of two).

    Don't start drooling yet - the dual core Intel P4's are out, but the dual core Xeon's won't hit the streets just yet.

    P.S.  -- Yes, Intel licensing is per CPU socket, not per core.

    Originally posted by Tryf
    Hi all

    I have just skimmed the review at:-

    The Tech Report for Dual Core Opterons

    Do Dual core Opteron's really outperform Dual Xeon 3.4's in some departments?

    This is really great news if it is true, because Microsoft has still apparently has kept the "per-processor" license for SQL Server. So you could just get a dual-core processor, and just one processor license for SQL Server because it is treated as just one processor.

    Has anyone any experience of using SQL Server 2000 with a Dual core processor - will it naturally take advantage of the dual core?

    Best wishes
    Tryfon
    Voicegateway.com Web Services - High-performance Hosting & Fully Managed Servers
    Specializing in Virtual Machine Hosting with Microsoft Virtual Server 2005 R2, Windows SharePoint Services, Microsoft SQL Server 2005, ASP.NET 2.0 hosting and Newsletter/Mailing list services

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    984
    The Xeon Dual Cores just haven't been performing up to snuff for me to even consider them unless they have major discounts compared to AMD Dual Core CPU's.

    AMD's are averaging 30% or better performance in applications like MySQL.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    The other issue with the Dual Core Xeons is heat. No matter what you do you can't keep them cool in a 1U case.

    Until recently we ran all Intel but the heat is becoming a big issue. There is a very significant difference when you put 20-30 servers. We figure we save 40%-50% on rack space since we can go with 1U AMDs.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

  13. #13
    Originally posted by mgphoto
    I went to the AMD/Microsoft Tech Tour last week. Microsoft said the per CPU license is per working/installed socket. Single or dual core does not matter, nor are you charged if there is no processor in the socket.

    As far as the SQL, they were pretty clear that it's going to be some time before there is significant code improvement to see any major changes in how well SQL performs on the dual core servers.
    But I thought SQL Server was already a multi-threaded application. I thought that most multi-threaded applications would make use of both cores of a dual core by default without any programming change. This is really disappointing. Additionally the latest PC-Pro magazine is banging on about SQL Server now too:-

    PC Pro magazine, August 2005 issue indicates on P.38 about the hidden cost of Dual core :-

    They indicate that Microsoft SQL Server Standard edition will run on a four processor server with dual-core processors, using all cores in the processors, without requesting more than four licenses.

    The article then goes on about how much IBM has to lose compared to Microsoft because the developers are already focused on dual-core processors from Sun,HP and IBM, and they would in effect risk losing half their income if they charged on a per processor basis.

    So what is the real story with SQL Server 2000 standard edition - why isn't a supposedly "multi-threaded" application - multithreaded?! I still don't get it - and all the media hype around this including now PC-Pro magazine, Issue 130, page 38.
    Last edited by Tryf; 06-23-2005 at 01:04 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,114
    It will still run on 64 bit but has no real advantage at this time.

    One other thing that was interesting was they stated, and I am trying to verify this, that if there is even 1 snippet of 16 bit code embedded in the software it will not run on the 64 Bit AMD. It's hard to believe, but apparently there is quite a bit of software that still has 16 bit software.
    SiteSouth
    Atlanta, GA and Las Vegas, NV. Colocation

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •