Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    801

    Which CPU for dedicated server

    Celeron, Pentium III, Pentium 4, AMD Duron, or AMD Athlon

    Which one of these cpu would be a good choice for a dedicated server. I've seen some dedicated server using Celeron, is that good enough ?

    Need everyone input on these ..


    Cheers,
    Roy K.
    Pixie Internet Services - http://www.pixiehost.com
    Affordable, reliable hosting solution with Instant Activation

  2. #2
    The faster the better. But it depends on what your site will have on it. Will it it mainly static HTML or have lots of scripts/databases? You obviously need more power for scripts. But for the minimal price difference from celeron to pIII it would be best to at least get the pentium.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    574
    Celeron sucks unless you're just serving static content. Look for a cpu with decent cache sizes.

  4. #4
    Not always the faster the better. I would rather have a PIII 1.4 Ghz than a P4 2.0Ghz as a server.



    Originally posted by JeremyV
    The faster the better. But it depends on what your site will have on it. Will it it mainly static HTML or have lots of scripts/databases? You obviously need more power for scripts. But for the minimal price difference from celeron to pIII it would be best to at least get the pentium.
    Jay

  5. #5
    Why would you prefer the PIII?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,008
    I've always been a pretty avid fan of Intel, so I'd probably take the Pentium III. I haven't had the chance to use a P4 yet but, it would probably be my second choice.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Chesterton, IN
    Posts
    792
    Originally posted by 311
    I've always been a pretty avid fan of Intel, so I'd probably take the Pentium III. I haven't had the chance to use a P4 yet but, it would probably be my second choice.

    Intel.....Celeron.....Intel Celeron.
    Matt De Leon
    GreekComm - http://www.greekcomm.com/
    Online Community for Greek Fraternities and Sororities.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    I'd go with the P3, then the P4, Athlon, Celeron, Duron. Sure the Athlon and the P4 may be the fastest but they aren't the best in cooling or stability. And those P3's were real horses too. Could take some serious stress.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    1,074
    as always, it will depend on what you need it for and what your personal preferences are. there is no "right" configuration, only a configuaration that suits your needs.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    61
    Celeron - Static websites, mail servers and DNS servers.

    Pentium III - Work horse systems. PHP, ASP, ColdFusion, perfect for them.

    Pentium 4 - Only when the customer wants the latest and greatest and requires Rambus RDRAM.

    AMD Duron - When the customer wants better then Celeron but doesn't want to pay for it.

    AMD Athlon - Another workhorse. PHP and ASP fly on it, for some reason I've found ColdFusion doesn't work as well as it does on P3s.
    Jason Murdock

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    379

    Processor

    I personally prefer the PIII or PXeon. The Celeron works great for some applications where cost is also an issue.

    We have customers who stream video using a Celeron and the server performs wonderfully pumping out over 1Mbps constantly. On the other hand, I would never dream of setting up a database server on a Celeron. It really depends upon your needs and what you are doing as to what is best, for you.

    I have heard mixed reviews and feedback on the P4. Most of what I have heard is it does not perform any better than a PIII and in some cases does not perform as well. The PIII is a proven product as is the Xeon.

    If cost is not the issue, go for the Xeon as it will outperform all of them.

    I cannot speak personally for AMD. Some people love them, mostly because of cost. I don't think it outperforms the Intel.
    Brad @ Xiolink
    XIOLINK. Your data...always within reach.®
    http://www.xiolink.com
    1-877-4-XIOLINK [+01 314 621 5500]

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    331
    I dont understand all of you...

    When you are getting a dual PIII 1.4, I'm getting a dual P4 Xeon at 2.4 GHz. That gives me a total of 2 GHz more processing power then you and allows me to serve up much more dynamic content, bandwidth, etc. GHz wise, thats 1 more processer then you have.

    Same goes for a standard P4 compared to a PIII. Same for dual versus single CPU too. A 2.4 compared to a 1.4 is always going to outperform. I would only contemplate if you gave me a Celeron 2.4 compared to a PIII 1.4.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    You have to think cost effective though. A P4 2.4GHZ is, what $300 cheaper than the 2.4GHZ Xeon? So $600 cheaper for a dually. I think the only time a Xeon would really show it's grunt as a database server.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    61
    Yes, but if you are only ever using one third of the power of that processor, it's not worth it. You just paid probably twice as much as I did for the same results. You need to look at the overall use of the system. You don't need to through a ton of processor performance at PHP. I'm running, on my personal server, a nice PHP based gallery site that used to, when I still worked for Verio and had 100Mbit access to the backbone, put 60 to 100GB of traffic in a day. The server is a Pentium 200 with 256MB of PC100 RAM and two 20GB ATA66 IDE drives. Everything is in PHP and mySQL is the back end.

    Think about it.
    Jason Murdock

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,508
    When you are getting a dual PIII 1.4, I'm getting a dual P4 Xeon at 2.4 GHz. That gives me a total of 2 GHz more processing power then you and allows me to serve up much more dynamic content, bandwidth, etc. GHz wise, thats 1 more processer then you have.
    But do you need it for the price?
    Mike @ Xiolink.com
    http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
    Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
    "Your data... always within reach"

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    331
    Yes I need the power. I run large databases and highly dynamic web sites in Cold Fusion.

    I don't build servers myself. I leave that to those who do it best. So, yes, its a bit more money if building it yourself, but when looking at some of the best server builders, P4 Xeon seem to be priced just slightly above PIII.

    www.qsol.com is more then an example. Build a Q13.i and a Dual PIII 1.4 machine costs $130 more than a P4 Xeon 2.4 Ghz. This I can not understand.

  17. #17

    my pick

    PIII or Athlon would be my pick- I would stay away from a P4 or Duron

    JDT
    ▄▀▄ Jeremy, CEO - Batcave Network
    ▄▀▄ Deals on Hosting, VPS, Domains, Dedicated Servers since 1997
    ▄▀▄ http://www.batcave.net
    ▄▀▄ We always have a deal going - hosting for cheaper than a domain!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    154
    Originally posted by inogenius
    Sure the Athlon and the P4 may be the fastest but they aren't the best in cooling or stability.
    ??

    For clarification purposes only (not arguing!)...I'm assuming the stability issues are related to the cooling issues?

    When would cooling ever be a problem? I would think a modern datacenter would have air conditioning unless of course the datacenter is someguy's garage in Phoenix!

    Same with the comment that

    "I would rather have a PIII 1.4 Ghz than a P4 2.0Ghz as a server."

    Could you please explain?

    I'm interested in the thought process behind this. I'm sure a lot of it is economical but why would you take a slower processor? Also doesn't Rackspace use Athlons (maybe Durons?). With their reliability record I doubt they would use something that would give them problems. Right?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    331
    Originally posted by jazz
    I'm interested in the thought process behind this. I'm sure a lot of it is economical but why would you take a slower processor?
    Ditto. For those of you who would prefer a PIII 1.4 over a P4 2.0, please explain why that is. (if price was the same that is)

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    145
    If you wanna get a P4 cpu, make sure you get the one with 512kb L2 cache and not the 256kb L2 cache.
    spam --> /dev/null

  21. #21
    AMD
    I'm AMD's fan.
    Powered by AMD & FreeBSD.
    "Documentation is like sex:
    when it is good, it is very, very good;
    and when it is bad, it is better than nothing."

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    MARS
    Posts
    557
    I would stay away from a P4
    If you don't want to get one off the best cpu for servers...

    you can ask for a extra fan..our get a p3 1.0 our 1.1

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    960
    I run both Intel P3 and P4 servers. They're very fast and reliable, no complains about speed. Never tried Athlon yet. As for Celeron/Duron, I don't think it's a good choice for server. They're more suitable for playing games

Posting Permissions

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