Results 1 to 23 of 23
Thread: Which CPU for dedicated server
-
11-06-2002, 07:18 PM #1Web Hosting Master
- 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
-
11-06-2002, 07:22 PM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 1,021
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.
-
11-06-2002, 07:32 PM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2002
- Posts
- 574
Celeron sucks unless you're just serving static content. Look for a cpu with decent cache sizes.
-
11-06-2002, 08:02 PM #4Doh!!
- Join Date
- Jan 2001
- Location
- NJ
- Posts
- 2,343
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
-
11-06-2002, 08:10 PM #5Newbie
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 14
Why would you prefer the PIII?
-
11-06-2002, 08:11 PM #6Web Hosting Master
- 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.
-
11-06-2002, 08:14 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- 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.
Matt De Leon
GreekComm - http://www.greekcomm.com/
Online Community for Greek Fraternities and Sororities.
-
11-06-2002, 08:22 PM #8Web Hosting Master
- 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.
-
11-07-2002, 04:06 AM #9Web Hosting Master
- 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.
-
11-07-2002, 11:18 AM #10Junior Guru Wannabe
- 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
-
11-07-2002, 12:02 PM #11Aspiring Evangelist
- 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]
-
11-07-2002, 04:11 PM #12Web Hosting Guru
- 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.
-
11-07-2002, 04:26 PM #13Web Hosting Master
- 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.
-
11-07-2002, 04:32 PM #14Junior Guru Wannabe
- 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
-
11-07-2002, 04:48 PM #15Web Hosting Master
- 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.Mike @ Xiolink.com
http://www.xiolink.com 1-877-4-XIOLINK
Advanced Managed Microsoft Hosting
"Your data... always within reach"
-
11-07-2002, 06:11 PM #16Web Hosting Guru
- 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.
-
11-07-2002, 09:39 PM #17Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Posts
- 288
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!
-
11-08-2002, 12:04 AM #18WHT Addict
- 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?
-
11-08-2002, 12:13 AM #19Web Hosting Guru
- 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?
-
11-08-2002, 04:22 PM #20WHT Addict
- 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
-
11-08-2002, 05:16 PM #21Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Posts
- 985
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."
-
11-08-2002, 08:06 PM #22Disabled
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Location
- MARS
- Posts
- 557
I would stay away from a P4
you can ask for a extra fan..our get a p3 1.0 our 1.1
-
11-09-2002, 02:34 PM #23Web Hosting Master
- 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