|
| |||||||||
| Tags: 233ghz, 3ghz, core, dual, quad, xeon |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
| 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?
Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup (assuming the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server 2003 Standard R2 64 Bit running: Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) File Server Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) Thanks for any advice. Adrian |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Re: 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?
Adrian wrote: > Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup (assuming > the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server 2003 > Standard R2 64 Bit running: > > Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) > Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) > File Server > Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) > > Thanks for any advice. > > Adrian > > Frankly, I would feel like both are overkill. I'd suggest a single CPU, single core, should be fine for that load MOST of the time. A dual core, I would feel, would RARELY see an issue. I will say get a box that is upgradable, but 25 "not very heavy users", file serving, 2 user database, and sharepoint shouldn't require a lot of horsepower. |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| Re: 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon? "Adrian" <NoSpam@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23TyouIYaHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup > (assuming the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server > 2003 Standard R2 64 Bit running: > > Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) > Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) > File Server > Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) A lot would depend on the actual (measured) Processor Queue Length -- if nothing is waiting on the Processor(s) most of the of the time then adding CPUs/Cores will have little or no effect. In such cases the faster but fewer CPUs would win. Most of the time however when CPUs Usage is high there are things waiting, but measuring is the only way to determine this. As "leew" says however, this whole thing may be academic as you likely have more power than you need for this load. -- Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP http://www.LearnQuick.Com (phone on web site) |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| Re: 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?
Given you're probably overkill here, I'd go for the 2x dual core. Frankly, I'm not all that impressed with the current round of quad core procs - the memory buss on the current generation just isn't up to them, IMHO. -- Charlie. http://msmvps.com/xperts64 "Adrian" <NoSpam@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23TyouIYaHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup > (assuming the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server > 2003 Standard R2 64 Bit running: > > Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) > Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) > File Server > Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) > > Thanks for any advice. > > Adrian > > |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| Re: 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?
"Adrian" <NoSpam@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23TyouIYaHHA.4520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup > (assuming the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server > 2003 Standard R2 64 Bit running: > > Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) > Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) > File Server > Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) > > Thanks for any advice. > > Adrian > > My advice - I've got a Workstation with each 2x3Ghz Dual Core and 2x2.4 Quad Core, and the applications I develope - well, I've not seen much of a difference, except I can process more threads simultaneously on the Quad Cores - YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary)! -- --- Star Fleet Admiral Q @ your service! "Google is your Friend" http:/www.google.com |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| Re: 2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?
* Adrian: > Any suggestions as to which would be faster in the following setup (assuming > the remainder of the hardware is the same) using Windows Server 2003 > Standard R2 64 Bit running: > > Exchange 2007 (25 users - not very heavy users) > Account software running Pervasive SQL (only 2 users) > File Server > Possibly install SharePoint Services on this server (light use) Both will be overkill. A single Core2Duo/XEON 3000 system (like a HP Proliant ML110 G4) with enough memory will probably more than enough... Besides that, while the current dual cores from intel are great the quad cores suffer from the shared FSB which gets a heavy bottleneck with 4 cores and applications that use lots of I/O (like the ones you list, usual number crunching apps run fine on quads).. For a server you should also concentrate on reliable hardware from a reputable vendor... Benjamin |
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| |
Similar Threads for: "2 Dual Core 3Ghz Xeon or 2 Quad Core 2.33Ghz Xeon?" | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Is Dual Core Optimizer needed after upgrading to Quad Core or 6 Core AMD? | Bhuvana21 | Motherboard Processor & RAM | 4 | 31-05-2011 09:31 AM |
| iMac 27" Core i7 vs Mac Pro 2.66 GHz Xeon | Sivann | Portable Devices | 6 | 28-05-2010 01:58 AM |
| When 3.33 GHz Westmere 6 Core Xeon is going to upgrade? | Bindu-I | Motherboard Processor & RAM | 5 | 26-05-2010 07:12 PM |
| Intel Core 2 Duo or Dual Core XEON ? | urgaffel | Motherboard Processor & RAM | 4 | 15-04-2009 12:35 AM |
| Dual Core Intel Xeon processor 5060 | Shell | Motherboard Processor & RAM | 6 | 02-02-2009 11:50 PM |