WHICH SERVER IS BETTER?? Check these specs.
 

Hey. Which server is better.. Server A or Server B??
Same price. I use a lot of heavy mysql along with apache and httpd.
The server will be pushed.


Server A:
Dual Xeon 3.0GHz w/HT (2x 1MB L2 Cache)
4GB DDR ECC REG RAM
146GB 15k SCSI HDD1
146GB 15k SCSI HDD1




Server B:
Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz (dual-cores, 4MB Cache)
4GB DDR2 ECC RAM
73GB 10k Raptor SATA HDD1
73GB 10k Raptor SATA HDD2

i would go with server one :)

Yep, server one. Faster HDD helps databases I/O.

My ace programer is prefering Server A.


"Core 2 duo is faster cpu but
15k scsi hdds are excellent, go with first one. Go with A"

Ok.. Sales guy just gave me more info on Server B. He says:

"Also consider with server B It's also able to upgrade to Quad-Cores later, which means you can grow when you need or desire."

yup go with A

mysql rapes hd's the most.

Also if this is for tgp's you should split it up into 3 servers

server 1 for thumbs

server 2 for mysql

server 3 for thumb and trading scripts

bro. you are talking to boneprone here! already do!

I invented that system!

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

Server A , much more space

Tomud

Then you should be well versed.

Go with "A." - and do not run MySQL on a server that runs any other processes if you can help it, it's going to be busy enough.

MySQL is still fastest on Linux x86_64, you're unlikely to see all 4GB available without a 64 bit OS. Good luck.

Yeah 64 bit OS will be given.

THe server is used for some cron updates, spidering, croping and search. Along with some smaller graphic hosting.

Ok. Lets say i upgrade server B to a Quad Core. Server A with the faster HD's still better?

No, I say B! The RAM is faster, the CPU is faster.

For what you will be using it for, the 10K RPM Raptors will be fine. It does sound like your apps are CPU and RAM heavy, so definitely go with B.

CPU vs CPU, the Dual Core will kick the Dual Xeon 3.0's ass.

Quadcore vs Dual Xeon 3.0 will rape.

My favorite CPU right now is the Core2Quad Q6600... it absolutely monsters through everything and is actually one of my best sellers. It sells so well that I keep running out of stock damnit!

Definitely get Server B, with Core2Quad Q6600.

Better disks are always better. CPU doesn't matter for static content, and DB doesn't use as much CPU unless your queries (or tables) are really fucking stupid.

You can run kernel-PAE on a 32bit OS and have all 4GB of RAM usable. PAE kernel works well for all the servers that run it here at our DC.

Unless you are doing processor intense work, you are unlikely to run out of processing power before your run out of bandwidth to your disk drives. If you are running things like blogs, TGPs, banner rotators, DB based sites... then you are way more likely to run out of disk access before your run out of CPU.

Super fast SCSI is the way to go, I think.

Sales dude says:

Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz (dual-cores, 4MB Cache)
4GB DDR2 ECC RAM
73GB 10k Raptor SATA HDD1
73GB 10k Raptor SATA HDD2

With ability to upgrade to quad later. Will this upgrade to quad be the quad strenth you are talking about? Is this or will it be a Core2Quad like this?

Which would be a bit more optimal for an overpowered webserver, and not to primarily function as a database.

one HD has mysql the other has httpd images.

It seems the mysql takes up a lot of the servers cpu..

If separated, it'll matter less, but not much so. Optimize your DB calls, and get the SCSI disks. SCSI is always better than IDE/SATA. It offloads it to the SCSI controller.

I'm done now.

Wouldn't know for sure unless he gave you the model number, but since the original is a Core2Duo I'm assuming by Quad he means its direct opposite which would be the Core2Quad Q6600.

Core2Quad Q6600
4 x 2.4Ghz, 8MB Cache


The SCSI will be better than the Raptor, but the B server has way better CPU and RAM. The performance increase you will see with SCSI 15K RPM vs Raptor 10K RPM will be marginalized in my opinion because of the B server's CPU/RAM.

The final outcome though will directly correlate with the amount of read/writes, frequency of each as well as optimization of your DB.
You could very well not see any difference if you dont properly optimize the DB/scripts.

now the better question is, why doesn't the sales guy you are talking to know all this already and offer this information / comparison to you directly?

technically informed sales reps are key to excellent service

heh, if you are really serious about performance, get a solid state hard drive and drop some serious bling.

you could actually do it on a budget depending on how big the database is.... a solid state/flash drive is only a few hundred dollars for several gigs so you can fit most databases on there and that will give you THE BEST performance ever.

You're suggesting a thumb drive, right? Wouldn't that be too slow over USB? Seems like the bottle neck would be the bus at that point.

Edit: Nevermind, you are talking about something over IDE/SATA bus. Duh.

keep it coming.

xeon all the way, especially cuz it's a server's cpu!

At first glance "A" for sure because it has faster SCSI HDs.

However, "B" might work fine for your needs ...

More specifically, what is size, scope, use, etc of the database you plan to put on the server?

A large DB that's mostly read-only that's well structured utilizing optimized queries could likely run on "B" just as well as "A" ...

Ron

the cpu might be good

but is the motherboard and ram good ??
and the rest of the hardware ?

to many of these posters know nothing about the new CPU's. the older Xeons (unless they are the newer Woodcrest or Clovertown dual/quad cores respectively) are all ass compared to the new Core2Duo CPU's.

All older Xeons vs new Core2Duo = core2duo ownage

Save your cash on those drives and get as much ram as you can. If you have many small files and a DB under <5GB, it should blaze even on IDE drives if the filesystem is cached in the RAM. If you have large files, save your cash on the SCSI and buy an Areca sata raid card with 1GB cache and stock those sata in raid0. Make sure you make backups.

Even though Server B is faster... a 10k raptor drive is still a desktop Sata drive and will not have the durability the scsi drives will.

scsi 15k still will do more iops than a 10k raptor drive.

your faster CPU will do you no good if it has to wait on disk IO, most common bottle neck today is due to high loads caused by disk waiting.

Trying to say a core2duo with slower drives will out perform a machine with faster drives on a strict IO based machine is a rather dumb suggestion. Sure you can upgrade the c2d processor in life but it still does you no good if your drives can't keep up. Unless of course you load up your machine with 8gb of ram then life will be fine.

my point was that they are suggesting Server A based on the Xeon CPUs, not because it has 15K RPM SCSIs. this is misleading, especially if he does not need the 15K RPM drives.

sure he will have mysql, but that doesn't automatically mean he needs 15K RPM SCSI's, his other scripts might be more demanding resource wise and he could very well benefit from the faster RAM and faster CPU.

We just don't have the proper specifics to give the correct answer, only speculate on theoreticals.

The answer is pretty simple to solve your IO question/performance.

Simple solution.

Have the provider run download and install the following.
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/...1.0-wht.tar.gz

gunzip -dvc unixbench-4.1.0-wht.tar.gz | tar xvf -
# cd unixbench-4.1.0-wht
# make
# ./Run

post results

it will produce a score based on IO/cpu/etc Good for creating benchmarks/work loads agains various server configurations.

For the comment someone posted about the sales guy. Yes he is giving his opinion of course.. This is it.. Only issue is its different from my programers opinion. My proramer seems to think the HD edge out weighs the cpu and memory. Personally I like the abilty to grow though..

Here's the sales dude:

"I, personally, would go with Core 2 Duo because it has faster CPU,
Memory, and ability to upgrade to Quad-Cores later (like Core 2 Quad Q6600:
4x 2.4GHz, 8MB Cache). The 10k Raptor SATA HDDs are also very fast.
This is also a brand new server with 4x hotswap bays, so you can add more
HDDs later as well. However, it's just my opinion."

ok.. give me a few. ill have it installed now..

Also want me to log in to ssh and post the results from "top"??

On Server A, I'd ask what the SCSI bus speed is, and I'd also ask on Server B if it's SATA 150 Mbps or 300 Mbps.

Take server A' HDD, SCSI rocks and Core 2 Duo from server B and you have one hell of a server :)