Results 1 to 9 of 9
Thread: Most CPU power per $
-
11-05-2006, 09:29 AM #1Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Bay Area
- Posts
- 1,320
Most CPU power per $
Hi,
I'll soon be needing a new webserver, and i'm in doubt about the CPU. There are basically five CPU types that i'm able to choose from:
- Pentium 4 3.6Ghz
- Core2 Duo 1.86Ghz
- Dual Xeon 2Ghz
- AMD x2 4000+
- AMD Opteron 246
They all are pretty budget, so I'd like to choose the one with most power for a Webserver (Lighttpd / PHP / MySQL).
The thing i'm unsure about is thr Core2 Duo. They are supposed to be of the same architecture as the Woodcrest Xeons, only a bit less cache. Did anybody ever compare the Woodcrest Xeon and the Core2 Duo? I wasn't able to find a review about that. The Core2 Duo is a LOT cheaper than a Woodcrest, so that might be a good option...
The x2 AMD seems to be a good choice also, however that is most certainly not a server-CPU. Most reviews test performance in 3D games and so on, completely worthless if you want to know server performance. Anybody who actually uses those in a webserver?
-
11-05-2006, 11:25 AM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- UK
- Posts
- 6,616
Its hard choice to make. I wouldn't go for the Dual Xeon 2Ghz as that will be the slowest. Is the AMD Opteron 246 a single or Dual CPU? If a single I would ignore that as well. My gut feeling is the Core2 Duo would be the best choice but none of them are bad
Russ Foster - Industry Curmudgeon
Freelance Sysadmin for Hire - email vaserv@gmail.com
-
11-05-2006, 09:50 PM #3Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- sydney.au
- Posts
- 248
I have a Core 2 Duo at the office, and it kicks serious butt. Even at 1.86GHz, it will mop the floor with the P4 and Dual Xeon. The AMD X2 4000+ is a pretty good chip, but the Core 2 Duo should easily outrun that as well.
-
11-06-2006, 12:54 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Bay Area
- Posts
- 1,320
Thanks for the replies
I think i'll go with the Core2 Duo then...seems to be the best choice
-
11-06-2006, 01:07 PM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 1,834
The CPU market is just amazingly crazy now with options, which makes giving a recommendation very difficult.
Used to be only PII, PIII, P4, and Xeons that anybody ever put into a server. Now there could literally be hundreds of options.██ 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
-
11-06-2006, 01:12 PM #6Newbie
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Posts
- 7
Id take the core2 aswell
-
11-06-2006, 03:44 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Location
- In a house
- Posts
- 949
I'm just waiting for the Intel quad cores to be out here shortly. As far as Core 2 Duo's vs. the Woodcrest's, the Woodcrests would outperform them, and the reports I'm hearing about is that the Woodcrests are outperforming the Dual Opterons like the Opterons did to the Xeons. Of course it's only a matter of time before AMD comes back over the top and so on and so forth.
You mentioned though your only choices are the 5 CPU types, why may I ask is that?
-
11-06-2006, 03:56 PM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 1,834
Originally Posted by PhMatt
It's not really a rediculous point, but I think my point is nobody just cannot keep up with dual, quad, cache this, and cache that......I would like to see slower, more progressive development cycles.██ 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
-
11-06-2006, 04:17 PM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Location
- In a house
- Posts
- 949
Originally Posted by PSFServers