• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Web server! Duel vs. Single processor?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

sethticlees

Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Location
Seattle, WA
My boss wants a duel proc system for the web server. I’m trying to convince him to go single processor but fast, like an AMD 2200XP on a DDR motherboard.

Anybody know if it’s worth saving the extra 300 bucks or should we just go duely?

Honestly, I don’t know what kind of load a web server produces so IMHO I suspect a kickass single processor will do nicely.
Also, considering the original server was a p200 system, I feel a single proc is well justified.

Please, let me know if I’m going about this all wrong!

I value the duel processor system but really it might be over kill in this situation.


Any ideas?




Seth
 

Jon

Just Another Retired Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
Location
Lawrenceville, GA
Depends on what he's serving. If it's basic HTML, it won't matter what you use so long as it has a decent disk subsystem in it. General webhosting doesn't use hardly any CPU power, nor memory.

If he's into databases, CGI, Perl, etc., then you might want to look into something a little more CPU/memory robust.

A good SCSI disk system is going to be the most important thing, however.
 
OP
S

sethticlees

Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Location
Seattle, WA
Well I just got the word... they're going with a duel processor!

I'm leaning toward the Tyan motherboard, Thunder K7 w/scsi and MP 2000+ procs.


Thanks for the quick reply Jon!

You were absolutely right.


;) Seth
 

64026402

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2002
Location
KC,MO USA
In my opinion any server would benifit from a dual setup. Even if you don't use the cpus all the way it would smooth out the multiple requests and threads that a server has to deal with.
I use a dual proc server at home and find the increase in speed noticable even though it's not heavy use.

The Thunder is a good board. I hope you like jumpers. SCSI onboard would be good. The access times of a decent SCSI drive should help the server.
The SCSI version is going for $199 refurb at newegg for the 2462.
 
OP
S

sethticlees

Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Location
Seattle, WA
The Thunder is a good board. I hope you like jumpers. SCSI onboard would be good. The access times of a decent SCSI drive should help the server.
The SCSI version is going for $199 refurb at newegg for the 2462. [/B]



Yeah, that’s the board I was looking at!;)

Not sure how I feel about setting lot's of jumpers though. I guess it's not my board so should let it go.

Can anyone suggest a high-end alternative to the Tyan?
Preferably one with BIOS management capabilities!

Thx :)
 

64026402

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2002
Location
KC,MO USA
sethticlees said:



Yeah, that’s the board I was looking at!;)

Not sure how I feel about setting lot's of jumpers though. I guess it's not my board so should let it go.

Can anyone suggest a high-end alternative to the Tyan?
Preferably one with BIOS management capabilities!

Thx :)

The Thunder boards are the high end. Tyans are designed for servers so bios frills are not added.
The Master-L Msi board would be nice and more user freindly on the bios. But no SCSI or video or dual Lan. But thats what the slots are for.
 

Civic_Addict

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Location
Ohio
I take you're not even looking into Intel?

You really ought to look into their SWE7500 series boards. Dual channel DDR memory(same tech as RAMBUS only not a wallet robber), onboard RAID (SCSI or IDE variety), dual 10/100 NICs, ATI Rage Graphics, 4 case fan conections onboard.

I just built a dual XEON system on one of these as a test server for Citrix. I gotta tell ya, it can handle loads wonderfully. The only drawback is the price. Though I hear SuperMicro makes a dual XEON board for under $300.

Either route, you'll be happy you went dual. Duals will handle the load much more efficently than a single processor.
 

Mr B

Senior Admin Emeritus
Joined
Dec 28, 2000
Location
East Bridgewater, MA
Civic_Addict said:
I take you're not even looking into Intel?

The only drawback is the price.

'nuff said.

I spent $300 on an MSI K7D Master-L and a pair of XP1600+'s. With a bit of effort, and rear window defogger grid paint, they're running at 12.5 x 140FSB (MP2100+...1750MHz each).

Every other component was "recycled" from the single CPU system it upgraded...RAM, drives, case, etc...

Honestly...how far is $300 going to get you buying intel Xeons, even before you figure in the price of a board to run them on?

(below from pricewatch.com, copied/pasted immediately after posting the above....)

$444 - Xeon 2.6GHz
$249 - Xeon 2.4GHz
$245 - Xeon 2.2GHz
$198 - Xeon 2.0GHz
$153 - Xeon 1.8GHz
 

SickBoy

Inactive Moderator
Joined
Jan 13, 2001
Location
Minneapolis, MN
$300 -might- get you a P4 Xeon board. Might.

The general consensus we've come to around here and at 2CPU is that if you've got the cash to blow, and dont care about overclocking, go Intel. If you aren't Donald Trump and want to play around with overclocking a little bit, AMD is the better choice.
 

Civic_Addict

Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Location
Ohio
SickBoy said:
$300 -might- get you a P4 Xeon board. Might.

The general consensus we've come to around here and at 2CPU is that if you've got the cash to blow, and dont care about overclocking, go Intel. If you aren't Donald Trump and want to play around with overclocking a little bit, AMD is the better choice.
True. Honestly if you're building a true business server, you aren't going to overclock it anyhow. Stability is a must.
 

cmcquistion

IT Director Senior
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
Location
Tennessee
Even if you don't overclock it, you have to consider cost. I just built a new file server for my work. Went with a MSI K7D Master and dual XP1800's. It has more power than I'll ever need and didn't cost a lot. I don't overclock it, since it services about 50 users, but even at default speed, it is very fast and is a joy to use. It just doesn't slow down. It is always fast for me and for the users. HUGE improvement over the single P4 server I used before. Just as stable as the P4 system, too. Probably more stable, IMO.

BTW, I use SVC GC68 heatsinks ($6 each) with Panaflo L1A fans on them (24 CFM @ 21 dBA, $7 each) on this system. Almost a silent computer, the SCSI drives are the loudest part of the whole system (using Panaflo L1A's for the intake and exhaust fans, too.) Running at default speed and 1.55 Vcore (this motherboard remains stable at Vcore settings lower than any other board I've ever used.) Temps at full load are 40-45C.

Noise may not be an issue for your server needs of course. It depends on whether you work in the same room as the computer:) I work in a room with 7 computers, so low-noise is paramount, to me.


Also, if you're upgrading from a P200 system, I wouldn't suggest spending a boatload on XP2200's or higher. Just get a couple cheap XP1600's. You probably won't notice any difference in speed on a server and you'll save money that you can spend next year, when XP2200's come down to $60:) You WILL want to invest in a good SCSI system, though. I'd recommend the Adaptec 2100 SCSI RAID card. It runs at 33 MHz, but is compatible with the 66 MHz PCI slots. It's pretty cheap and has upgradable cache (up to 128 MB PC100.) Pair it with a few 15K RPM SCSI drives on RAID 5 and you've got a very fast and very stable disk system.
 
Last edited: