Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    73

    Which server configuration is better?

    I am looking to buy a server for colocation at the moment. I have hard time to decide which box to choose.

    Specs1:
    P4 2.4Ghz CPU with 512k cache
    1.5Gb Sdram
    80GB HDD with 8MB cache
    Dual network card

    Specs2:
    Dual P3 1.13GHz with 512K cache
    1.5Gb ddr ram
    80GB HDD with 8MB cache
    Dual network card.

    Which one can handle the server load better and allows me to push more bandwidth?? This server would be used to serve an adult site with a lot of pic and video feed.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,963
    2

  3. #3
    Originally posted by clocker1996
    2
    I disagree. For pushing mostly pictures and video I would imagine setup 1 would have a lower load. I remember reading some comparisons between single 2GHz P4s and dual 1GHz PIIIs where the P4s won... I'm going to try and find the link right now
    Jeremy [email protected]
    Front Drive Advanced multi-domain hosting solutions
    http://www.frontdrive.com/

  4. #4

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    96
    Spec 2 would probably better, Dual is always good for server and I beleive Spec 2 is more expensive too.
    Hostany, Inc.
    Hostany Low Cost - High End Dedicated Hosting Provider
    http://www.hostany.com
    Distributor and Partner of CPanel/DarkORB

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Westbury, LI NY
    Posts
    1,705
    Originally posted by tribby
    I disagree. For pushing mostly pictures and video I would imagine setup 1 would have a lower load. I remember reading some comparisons between single 2GHz P4s and dual 1GHz PIIIs where the P4s won... I'm going to try and find the link right now
    Only one thread can be handled at a time in a single CPU system, a dual CPU system does not double load capaty, each addtiotn CPU only sacales from about 80% of the previous CPU. But it increases overall responsiveness of the system by allowing SMP to process two threads at once.

    http://www.turbotech.ch/articles2000...l_vs_p4k7.html

    Shocking as it might sound, a dual Pentium III 800 MHz system gives you more power than a 1.5 GHz Pentium 4 or a 1.2 GHz Athlon - by a wide margin.

    http://www.inqst.com/articles/p3vp4/p4vp3.htm

    The range of applications we have evaluated here suggests that SMP capability could have a valuable performance impact for many Windows 2000 power users. Without doubt we will continue to find other applications of interest to professionals and consumers that respond favorably to the existence of a second CPU.

    Under such SMP friendly circumstances, a fast single processor P4 cannot really stand up to a comparison with a Dual P3 or Dual Athlon platform. Merely raising the clock speed of the P4 a few more notches cannot compensate for the performance deltas we have seen in this project.


    (that last link coutesy of the nice folks at forums.2cpu.com worlds best forum for higher end computer)

    Basically, what these benchmarks show is that for a system that runs more than one thread at once, it will be done faster with an SMP system, even one at lower clock speeds due tot eh fact that more than one thing gets done at once.

    Option number 2 is better. Especially is he is running a database for membership or content. Secondly, to push data faster, go SCSI as harddrives are always the largest bottleneck from within a system.

  7. #7
    Thanks for clearing that up Acronym BOY. I guess what I read wasn't dealing with servers meant for web?
    Jeremy [email protected]
    Front Drive Advanced multi-domain hosting solutions
    http://www.frontdrive.com/

  8. #8
    Spec 2 has total 1024K cache but only 512k cache in Spec 1
    2 must run better in a heavily loaded server despite the concern of threads.
    RyanMandrake

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Westbury, LI NY
    Posts
    1,705
    Originally posted by tribby
    Thanks for clearing that up Acronym BOY. I guess what I read wasn't dealing with servers meant for web?
    The issue with SMP is that it never scales 100%. Think of it this way, I have a dual P3 1GHz. My friend has a P4 2.2GHz. His computer, by far, can give more fps in quake and handle video encoding much faster than mine can.

    But that is only because he does one thing at a time. My computer is always doing 5 things at once. The second you load up his computer with some database work, some mp3 playing, and a photoshop filter, it slows to a crawl, whereas mine is more responsive and I can still move my mouse and go fast forward to another song. Mine may take a bit longer to do things, but I dont lose the responsiveness that SMP (also SCSI) was designed to give you.

    Even if an OS is SMP capable, it still needs multiple threads to split between processors. If you server webpages to 10 concurrent users at once, while doing some database work, and mail serving, SMP will help you as you dont have ot wait for a thread to get off the CPU and give someone else a turn.

    Hope this helps.

    EDIT:

    kktsang also brought up another good point, cache is good. Very good. There is a reason that brand new Xeons with 2MBs of cache cost a few thousand.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,194
    Drop two dual amd's in there,
    www.boxedhost.com
    COMING SOON!
    A Resellers Dream, In a Box

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    889
    Originally posted by Acronym BOY

    But that is only because he does one thing at a time. My computer is always doing 5 things at once. The second you load up his computer with some database work, some mp3 playing, and a photoshop filter, it slows to a crawl, whereas mine is more responsive and I can still move my mouse and go fast forward to another song.
    What OS is he running??

    I hope you are exaggerating about "slows to a crawl" because I can run a PS filter, mp3s and a few other apps on a P1 233 128 meg RAMmachine w/o mp3 skipping, slow mouse movement, system slowdown, etc on win2k.

Posting Permissions

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