I am upgrading an old Dell Server for a small medical office and would like viewpoints as to using something like an AMD 8 core ie. 8320 vs a I5 3550p. Also as to RAM 8 vs 16 gb , speed. Most of the use is as a file server for the medical software with EMR. Price/performance is a factor. TIA
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
AMD vs Intel for small business server
- Thread starter Craxbax
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2011
- Location
- Waterbury, CT
Out of my depth here, my feeling is does not make a great deal of difference.
Depending on the file load Intel cores are faster than AMD modules, so will the office crowd the four Intel cores or not?
Memory for servers seems "more is better."
You could consider a Xeon E3-1230V2 or better, basically an i7 3770 without video or overclocking, supports EMC memory if desired. I think most Asus and Gigabyte motherboards support Xeons.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117286
You can save a few bucks on the FX-8350 but the Xeon, as a server chip has an appeal.
Depending on the file load Intel cores are faster than AMD modules, so will the office crowd the four Intel cores or not?
Memory for servers seems "more is better."
You could consider a Xeon E3-1230V2 or better, basically an i7 3770 without video or overclocking, supports EMC memory if desired. I think most Asus and Gigabyte motherboards support Xeons.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117286
You can save a few bucks on the FX-8350 but the Xeon, as a server chip has an appeal.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Location
- AMD land
- Thread Starter
- #4
I was looking at the E3 over the I5, but like you, it may not make much difference for a server application to go with an 8 core AMD. While I favor Intel, a few of the IT guys I know seem to prefer AMD for these small business servers. So hence my question here.
Overkill/over budget my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Location
- AMD land
it will be used only as a file server? or firewall/e-mail/DNS
To get a better response, it would be helpful to know what the server is suppose to accomplish and the typical load that it will see. For just a file server, quad core is plenty if not overkill but it does allow for future proofing if new tasks are thrown onto the server.
- Thread Starter
- #7
It mostly will serve as a file server for 3-5 workstations/PDAs/plus medical device input but firewall/web hosting/email/etc. has been and will be part of it's function. Upgrading a 8 yr old system - Dell Poweredge 830 (Pentium D with 2 gb RAM) running SBS 2003. (New PSU,CPU,MB,16 gb RAM, 3x 1 tb HD in RAID 5, oper. system.) Just about any newer quad and more RAM will be a big improvement so the question really is which cpu will give the most bang for the $. Can I get by using desktop components ie. cpu/MB/nonECC RAM or stick with strictly server components?
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Location
- AMD land
how about this AMD build or this Intel build .Both are made with standard pc parts. Forgot to add this NIC.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Location
- CFL
Buy a real server. A motherboard designed to stay on 24/7 and an entry level CPU.
I have a super micro board with a i3 equivalent of a Xeon CPU. We only use it as a file server and have had zero problems with compared to the desktop turned "server" PC that we had before, which was a Dell Optiplex.
I have a super micro board with a i3 equivalent of a Xeon CPU. We only use it as a file server and have had zero problems with compared to the desktop turned "server" PC that we had before, which was a Dell Optiplex.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2010
- Location
- Centennial, CO
Coming from a guy that manages roughly 5000 Physical servers, Intel!
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2008
- Location
- CFL
Supermicro is a good brand for server motherboards.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182253
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182253
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2011
- Location
- Pacific NW USA
In one word, Intel. Now I'll explain exactly why. I'm currently in the middle of doing exactly what you're doing. The old server was an Irwindale Xeon (single core) based system that they picked up around '04-'05. I researched the options including upgrading. The choices you're looking at are not what you should be checking out. And the simple answer is because you should be running ECC. Where information is critical you're better off using ECC for information assurance purposes. With that in mind, after going over the prices of what they would need, new HDD's, CPU (at least quad preferably with HT), Motherboard that supports ECC (server class in other words), new PSU (after 8 years it's time to replace almost everything) etc. and then add to that the newest Server OS (if you're running 2003 support stops sometime next year last I checked) you're at the price of a new Dell server anyways. So I spec'd out a new server for them and now I'm "building" the server (starting the network file/user structure etc. from scratch to streamline and ensure HIPAA compliance). I spec'd out a T110 II with a xeon E3-1230v2 (Ivy based) with 8 GB's of memory, 1 HDD (it's cheaper to pick up HDD's elsewhere) DVD reader and Win Server 2012 Essentials (25 user limit) for around $1200. Add to that a hot swap bay and extra HDD's for backup swapping from newegg and it's not a bad price at all. As far as AMD goes, I don't mean to say that Opteron would be a bad choice (especially the lower power options) but every opteron system I checked out was way way beyond budget. Probably geared more towards Data centers considering most of them were blade form factor. If you go that route (which I highly advise) make sure you start with the E3-1230 v2 as it's the first in the series that has HT enabled. I can tell you from doing the install so far and setting up and running several virtual machines for certain software that it's more than powerful enough to handle everything you'll throw at it for several years to come at the very least. Keep in mind one thing when you're looking at upgrading SBS OS. Windows SBS is no more, it's now "Essentials". If you are going to do any kind of remote connections by users (virtual desktop infrastructure etc.), with Essentials you'll be limited to 2 simultaneous Admin RDP sessions as well as you'll only be able to use "Anywhere Access" (web browser based) for users. To do actual VDI or client virtualization which requires terminal services (now called remote desktop services "RDS") you'll need to use Win Server 2012 "Standard" edition which then requires a license for either every user or every "device". But anyways, that's my advice to you. Go Dell (best prices when I compared Lenovo, Dell and HP) and choose the 1230 or higher if you want more than 4 threads.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2011
- Location
- Pacific NW USA
I just checked, the same system I recommended and they picked up (with the H200 raid card, forgot to list that before) is still at $1232. Also remember that HIPAA requires the Server to be bolted to the floor or secured in some fashion (like cable lock that's secured to floor or wall etc.). And also think about centralization (user folder redirect etc.) to keep info off client pc's if it isn't already set up like that.
I'm sorry to say this, but your whole reasoning falls apart right here.
Even if ECC would be useful (which for a file server I highly doubt), you're not limited to server grade motherboards. All new AMD motherboards provide ECC support, which means you can easily grab 8320 with something like M5A99X EVO and grab ECC memory for it.
Why shoot a mosquito with a cannon?
ECC is not really as necessary as some may think, especially for small servers. For bigger servers you have no choice as everything is running on ECC memory. If it's mission critical hardware then it needs ECC but most smaller offices can live without it and most can work without bigger problems if server won't run couple of hours.
Anyway if you need small server for up to 10-15 office users then good and quite cheap are DELL/IBM servers based on Xeon E3-1230v2/3 where you can use up to 4x HDD, RAID 1/10. I'm usually not recommending RAID5 for small servers as RAID10 is much faster and easier to recover. For these servers you can use 500GB/1TB/2TB enterprise grade SATA drives what should be enough for everything and at least in the office you won't notice difference between SATA and SAS.
I like DELL PE T110 II:
http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/poweredge-t110-2/fs
I wouldn't recommend AMD for smaller servers. For some reason brands like IBM are keeping only single series based on AMD. Don't understand me wrong, AMD are not bad but you have to pick hardware for your needs and in smaller servers Intel is beating AMD the same as in desktops ( these CPUs are similar ).
Anyway if you need small server for up to 10-15 office users then good and quite cheap are DELL/IBM servers based on Xeon E3-1230v2/3 where you can use up to 4x HDD, RAID 1/10. I'm usually not recommending RAID5 for small servers as RAID10 is much faster and easier to recover. For these servers you can use 500GB/1TB/2TB enterprise grade SATA drives what should be enough for everything and at least in the office you won't notice difference between SATA and SAS.
I like DELL PE T110 II:
http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/poweredge-t110-2/fs
I wouldn't recommend AMD for smaller servers. For some reason brands like IBM are keeping only single series based on AMD. Don't understand me wrong, AMD are not bad but you have to pick hardware for your needs and in smaller servers Intel is beating AMD the same as in desktops ( these CPUs are similar ).
Last edited:
I think ECC is quit important in general, and super important for any server where data integrity is important. I recommend motherboards that have chipkill to detect and correct multi bit errors, and log error events.
Though all AMD processors (other than the A series) support ECC, most AMD motherboards do not support ECC. The only non-server mb that I have found that has support is Asus. That is why my last 2 AMD builds have used Asus mb's. I know that no consumer ecs, gigabyte, msi mb supports ECC. I asked a gigabyte rep about it last year, and he didn't even know what ECC was.
As for 'why shoot a mosquito with a cannon', what is your memory error rate? How do you measure it if you don't have ECC error logging?
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2011
- Location
- Pacific NW USA
1)As I said before, where data integrity is crucial then ECC is a must. For example, when saving patient information like allergies current medication, prescriptions etc. (especially when that data may be in a numerical code format consisting of just a few numbers or a few numbers with a letter etc.) do you really think trusting standard memory is an excellent idea? Is saving a hundred dollars or MAYBE a couple of hundred dollars worth the risk of data corruption that may cause someone to receive improper treatment? We're not talking home users. What about any kind of business where just a few transposed ones and zeros can cause problems or even loss of money or create liability? (I can think of many) It's better to have ECC and it's not needed then to have needed ECC and not have it.
2)In what universe is it a good idea for a business to run a server 24/7 with a CPU that easily consumes double or triple or even more energy (Bulldozer, Piledriver series) than the comparable Ivy Xeon or soon to be released Haswell based Xeon CPU?? That makes absolutely zero business sense. And I have yet to see any (who knows maybe there are a handful out there somewhere) non server AMD motherboards that support ECC memory. At a time when most businesses are upgrading systems to low power systems or transitioning to extremely low power "thin clients" running virtual desktops off a server in a VDI environment to cut costs and power consumption (which is also a cost to the business by the way) you're seriously recommending one of the most power hungry CPU's to come out in a while?? Really?
As I pointed out before and Woomack pointed out, there are some excellent choices from Dell and a few others that are inexpensive and cost effective for a small business or office (I would say 75 users or less instead of 10-15 or less).
Last edited:
