Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1

    Dual-Core Xeon vs. Dual-Core Opteron

    I'm looking at getting a new server and I have a choice between Xeons and Opterons.

    I'm looking at at getting a server from ServerDirect.com, which are the following:
    1) (1) Dual-Core Xeon 3.2 GHz (1066 MHz)
    2) (2) Dual-Core Xeons 3.0 GHz (667 MHz)
    3) (1) Dual-Core Opteron #265
    4) (1) Dual-Core Opteron #270

    All have 1 GB of RAM, (2) 250 GB Hard Drives, RAID Controller, etc.

    My budget is around +/- $1650 to start, so that is why I have #2 with 2 CPUs. It would also be nice to have the ability to add another CPU to #1,3,4 if I needed it in the future. Which of the above servers would get me the best performance for Web Hosting (PHP, MySQL, HTML, etc)?

    Are there any resources out that that are geared towards web hosting servers that would compare the different kind of processors out there?

    Thanks for the help!
    Ryan
    FXH, Inc :: Web Hosting, Web Design, rsync and R1Soft Backup Solutions, and more!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    633
    Opterons hands down, especially compared to the Xeons you're looking at. Both of those are far behind the Opteron. It's only the Woodcrest chips that start to catch up a bit. Plus, you'll be drawing a heck of a lot less power.
    Former owner of A Small Orange
    New owner of <COMING SOON>

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    As was said, Opterons hands down. The Dempsey dual core Xeons can't hold a candle to the dual core Opterons, which is what the Xeons you listed are, but the Woodcrests are another story.
    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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,872
    I will 2nd both comments. however, socket 940 dual-core's are also outdated by socket F opteron 221x already!

    I will recommend this order:
    Xeon Woodcrest 51xx, 2x2M L2, 1333fsb
    Opteron 221x socket F dual-core
    Opteron 2xx socket 940 dual-core
    Xeon Dempsey dual-core

    since you have low budget, don't overlook Core2 Duo (Conroe), espeically E6600 and up (2x 2M L2) if you need 2-core only. also, AMD Athon64 X2-4400 (= Opteron 175) is a very intelligent choice.
    C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
    http://www.apaqdigital.com
    sales@apaqdigital.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Richmond, BC
    Posts
    196
    AMD all the way, they operate faster and colder then comparable Intel processors.

    If you can budget it, go for a Socket F AMD processor for the best performance per watt. If you have a lower budget, the S940 processors will work quite effectively but I would push the AMD Opterons in either case.

    Just my 0.02 cents.. :-)


    -
    Rory

  6. #6
    BTW: what is the wattage of the Core2 Duo (Conroe)?. I see that the AMD Athon64 X2-AM2 energy efficient (EE) perform at 35 W which is really cool IMO. Can't make up my mind yet.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,872
    Quote Originally Posted by RoryErickson
    AMD all the way, they operate faster and colder then comparable Intel processors.

    If you can budget it, go for a Socket F AMD processor for the best performance per watt. If you have a lower budget, the S940 processors will work quite effectively but I would push the AMD Opterons in either case.

    Just my 0.02 cents.. :-)


    -
    Rory
    in term of delivering performance per amperage, AMD opteron's had been beating up Intel Nocona/Irwindale/Dempsey for years now. however, Intel woodcrest has the upper hand now, a complete reversal is hanppening. put the low-power version aside, the main-stream 65watt Woodcrest crushes "regular" Opteron 89watt on just about all enterprise applications.

    BTW, socket F opteron's priced the same with socket 940 opteron's. in fact, dual socket F platform's cost is lower than dual socket 940's, why?
    1. ECC registered DDR2 is cheaper than ECC registered DDR1
    2. Tyan S3970G2NR dual socket F board with 8x DDR2 DIMM, 2x PCI-X, 2x Intel Gb and costs much lower than "traditional" 8x DIMM dual socket 940 board
    3. with board like S3970G2NR (small ATX footprint), it's small enough to be installed in much less expensive 2-bay 1U chassis or 4-bay short-depth 1U, while dual socket 940 board (extended ATX) must be housed by extra deep 4-bay 1U chassis which by itself is over $400 easy.
    C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
    http://www.apaqdigital.com
    sales@apaqdigital.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Support Ticket Near You!
    Posts
    1,106
    Crrushes Opterons?

    Links please.

    Don't forget Intel have billions dollars worth of inventory of obsolete CPUs they have to get rid of especially due to Conroe. So we might as well help them.

    In saying that, Woodcrest still has many disadvantages including:
    -Woodcrest can't scale beyond dual socket
    -It only has 36 bit addressing instead of 40
    -It uses much older cache synchronizaition
    -Woodcrest (Intel's latest) has to communicate over FSB for both I/O and cache coherency, where as Opteron uses HT bus.

    Intel is using older technology from the past, but that doesn't matter, they still perform. But we're only talking about Woodcrest here and only for single or dual CPU applications (hardware wiseand software.

    Any P4 or Xeon is obsolete. Now they are pushing Conroe/Woodcrest for ALL their needs and it is really only specifically targeted for desktop users. Which is where all they hype / marketing begins.

    If you want "performance" according to all the benchmarks out there, go for Woodcrest / Core DUO (NOT XEON). If you want scalability, flexibility i.e Up to 4 processors or more, go Opteron. Plus they maybe slightly cheaper? I'm not too sure, haven't checked in a while.

    Although, I'm am still yet to hear someone who is actually running both these processors / systems concurrently tell me Woodcrest is "crushing" the Opteron or they have the upperhand for that matter.

    Can some dedicated provider here or datacenter shed some light on this?
    HostGuard.net - VPS Control Panel
    Automating and monitoring your hosting business.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Katatonic
    Crrushes Opterons?

    Links please....?
    http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2793
    http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/...ys_on_opteron/
    two industry most reputable hardware review sites, in fact they are competetors with each other since mid 90's, agrees the same thing. especially on enterprise apps such as order entry, SQL, database, forums, woodcrest beats opteron by more or less 100%. that will certainly qualifies the term "crushed"!

    even let's assume performance is the same between woodcrest's and opteron F's, woodcrest based server will use 0.5amp less power which is counting big time in data center worldwide nowadays! unless you want to pay few hundreds more to get low-power Opteron 22xx which stills use 65watt like "regular" woodcrest does.

    data center as large as AtlantaNAP/C4D/Equinix, tell me the percentage of 8-way servers are running now! I bet 99% servers in popular DC's now are 4-core or less, so whether Opteron can do 8-way or not carries very little weight for 99% of hosts/opterators out there! in fact, a few of my vendors are dumping Otperon 8xx (selling them at price of 2xx) because no one wants them for twice the premium of 2xx!
    C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
    http://www.apaqdigital.com
    sales@apaqdigital.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Support Ticket Near You!
    Posts
    1,106
    Datacenters don't necessarily decide what people use, the people do.

    4p is still a viable solution for upgrades / high end "super" servers (depending on application).

    Sure, people can use commodity servers if they are paying the cost for power as well. But if I'm not paying the power bill and can co-locate 4p+ servers, why not?

    Doesn't the fact that Intel can't offer such a solution say anything about their technology?

    But yes, either way, for the most, Intel is a nice solution, like in the case of the thread starter. Provided he does get a Woodcrest CPU.

    Also, benchmarks are a tool to optimizing the best solution. It is not something to say what is better than what People have turned it into that, but that's not the what the purpose of benchmarking was (since it was first introduced) and still isn't. It's the closest reference the public has without actually knowing how the technology works

    Simply put, don't always believe the media.
    HostGuard.net - VPS Control Panel
    Automating and monitoring your hosting business.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Support Ticket Near You!
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by cwl@apaqdigital
    http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2793
    http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/...ys_on_opteron/
    two industry most reputable hardware review sites, in fact they are competetors with each other since mid 90's, agrees the same thing. especially on enterprise apps such as order entry, SQL, database, forums, woodcrest beats opteron by more or less 100%. that will certainly qualifies the term "crushed"!
    Given the above link where does it say 100%? It says by ~30% against Opteron CPUs, however, what would you expect from the latest product anyway? AMD will release something with that kind of performance gain anyway. It also said PREDESSOR by 100%, not Opteron.

    Also, Toms Hardware didn't post anything to do with Opteron, if you realised, just like AMD do it was a marketing insight They did the same thing with Netburst and look where that got them.

    Anyway, no point carrying on. Just hoping you get more of an understanding and think for yourself.
    HostGuard.net - VPS Control Panel
    Automating and monitoring your hosting business.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,872
    99.9% of server inquries from "ordinary folks", not data center staffs, we get don't involve 8-way or 16-way server. in fact, there is no 8-socket server board, supposedly for Opteron 8xx, ever made by major server manufacturers such as supermicro, tyan. sure, HP/IBM/Sun may have some 16-way+ servers using Opteron, but those are way beyond what "ordinary folks" wants for these types of entry level rack/tower servers housed by ordinary DC.

    PLUS, 4-core CPUs are on the way, pretty soon a small 1U rack server can have 8-core worth of computing power!
    C.W. LEE, Apaq Digital Systems
    http://www.apaqdigital.com
    sales@apaqdigital.com

Posting Permissions

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