Results 1 to 19 of 19
Thread: Dual Opteron vs. Dual Xeon (Now)
-
01-23-2006, 01:36 PM #1Disabled
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Posts
- 67
Dual Opteron vs. Dual Xeon (Now)
Since the 64-bit operating systems are still not ready to be used with a cPanel production server, I'm curious which (Opteron 246 vs. Dual Xeon 2.8) would be better using 32-bit software.
-
01-23-2006, 01:39 PM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 2,197
We find the Dual Opteron 246's perform a fair bit faster than Dual Xeon 2.8ghz in 32bit.
crucialparadigm - Affordable, Reliable, Professional :
Web Hosting
24/7 Support Web Hosting Reseller Hosting Cloud/VPS Plans Dedicated Servers
-
01-23-2006, 02:10 PM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Australia
- Posts
- 642
Dual Opteron will definately be better
-
01-23-2006, 02:21 PM #4Disabled
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- Chicago,IL
- Posts
- 16
Everyone Is going to opt for the Dual Opteron.... I myself also will choose the Opteron's over a Xeon for Personal Preference.
-
01-23-2006, 03:56 PM #5Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- QLD, Australia
- Posts
- 285
Yeah,
I opt for Opteron's however I'm wary of purchasing them for sale in Australia. That's primarily driven by price and heat factors. In Australia we have a major problem with cooling requirements that hot servers can endanger an entire rack.
Guess that's what happens when you setup a DC where it's 30+ degrees celcius normally (spike to 40-45) while being the driest country on the planet.
Stuart
-
01-23-2006, 04:14 PM #6Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- <<Canada>>
- Posts
- 736
we never tried the Dual Xeon but we have all Dual Opteron. It work so well with. we will never go back intel or evil inside
<<< Please see Forum Guidelines for signature setup. >>>
-
01-23-2006, 05:11 PM #7WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Posts
- 157
I'd take the opteron.
-
01-23-2006, 07:16 PM #8Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Southern NYS
- Posts
- 535
Opterons, hands down.
PacketAce
Because packets were meant to be delivered.
Premium Mzima Bandwith at Equinix - Secaucus, NJ
-
01-23-2006, 07:28 PM #9Newbie
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 7
Originally Posted by BostonLegalFan
Thanks
-
01-27-2006, 11:40 PM #10Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Location
- Coxsackie, NY
- Posts
- 190
I'm more curious on the actual facts or reasons why people choose opteron.
I know a lot of ppl just dont like intel, but there has to be other reasons I do not see an intel side argued here
I go with Intel just because of my deals with Dell and Gateway, but if AMD is a better suit I may switchThe best way to predict the future is to create it.
"Never put yourself in the position of taking something away from the people you lead."
-
01-28-2006, 12:02 AM #11Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- US of A
- Posts
- 430
Because a dual Operton 246 is much more powerful than dual 2.8 Xeon. You can use this bench mark here.
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_cont...x36o252&page=6
It doesn't have Operton 246 or Xeon 2.8 but you can scale it down to compare the performance.
-
01-28-2006, 12:14 AM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 1,834
Originally Posted by stein██ Ray Womack @ atOmicVPS LTD
██ Linux & Windows Cloud Hosting Solutions Powered by OnApp
██ Fully Managed [Shared] ► [Reseller] ► [Cloud VPS] ► [Dedicated]
██ Featuring the atOmicSTACK ● Speed ● Performance ● Reliability
-
01-28-2006, 12:59 AM #13Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Posts
- 77
I think I read a thread here saying that there were problems with CPanel and -some- 64bit OSes, but it worked fine with CentOS 4.2... don't take my word for it though, I don't use cPanel myself so I don't have first hand experience.
-
01-28-2006, 07:05 AM #14Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Location
- Montreal, PQ
- Posts
- 355
Originally Posted by Perlboy
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1852524,00.asp
-
01-28-2006, 07:06 AM #15Newbie
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 10
I'm running dual opteron 246 using cpanel and centOS 4.2 x86_64. No problems here.
-
01-28-2006, 07:14 AM #16Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Palma de Mallorca, Spain
- Posts
- 263
Running a single Opteron with centOS 4.2 x86_64 have gave us problems. DC performed heavy hardware tests with no problems but the box got frozen several times a week with no reason nor kernel messages
-
01-28-2006, 12:52 PM #17Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 623
Never compare the processors directly. The Xeon chipset from Intel is solid. Since AMD doesn't make chipset, the chipset for Opteron from third parties varies greatly. I have heard good things about NVidia, but not the others.
Also, you have to consider the vendors....are you ordering Dell or HP only, or do you build your own box?
Third, it probably doesn't matter anyway because most of the time, you hit the IO and memory bottleneck way before the CPU. Sure, maybe you hit the IO bottleneck when Xeon's load is 20% and Opteron's load is only 10%, but that still doesn't matter. The server's performance is determined by the slowest component, not the fastest.
Take a look at tpc.org and their benchmark results. Look at the server configurations. Note every vendors have 200 to 300 HD's in RAID-0 for a dual Xeon or Opteron server. That will give you a pretty good idea on the HD performance needed to match the processor.
-
01-28-2006, 02:17 PM #18THE Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 6,957
Originally Posted by riverpast
In most benchmarks I have seen, they use similar specs otherwise, in drives, memory, etc. I must say, I have never seen any usuing any unusual drive setups. You'll definitely need RAID to best utilize the processing power of any dual CPU setup.Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
VMware Virtual Data Center Platform
karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
-
01-28-2006, 03:47 PM #19Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 623
You are right. I stand corrected. I am terribly outdated on AMD info.
Regarding RAID, everyone should take a look at TPC results. To make a fair comparison, you can look at HP 38X results. They configured it with 170 HD's for both dual Xeon and dual Opteron server. The HD's are configured as RAID-0 and RAID-10's and the database files are saved to seperate RAID's. Of course, the dual Opteron comes out ahead (reasonable margin).
For the dual Opteron (dual core), the HD count increased to 296!
It makes me drool.
Yes, Opteron, as a processor, will outperform Xeon. However, do you have 170 HD's to configure your box to utilize that processor power?
I am in the middle of configuring a DB server with Quad P-3/700 with 28 HD's (very outdated CPU techology). I still have the feeling that the HD will be the bottleneck instead of CPU. I would have prefered 52 HD's if it is not for the space and power constraint.