How many processor cores will Windows Server 2003 Standard x64 use

I have been trying to find out how many processor cores Windows Server 2003
x64 Standard Edition will use, but come across contradictory information.

This link
http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...read_brief.doc
suggests Windows 2003 Standard can have four Quad core processors and use
all the cores. However this link
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...efeatures.mspx
suggests to me that it is only going to use 4 'cores' maximum.


Any ideas?



Thanks,



Adrian

Hello,

Thank you for using newsgroup!

Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can have up to four processors. For
most currently shipping Microsoft software with processor limits, each
processor counts as a single processor regardless of the number of cores
and/or threads that the processor contains. For example, Windows Server
2003 Standard Edition can be used on a four-processor system, whether the
processors in the system are single-core, hyperthreaded, or multicore.

I have readed the following document:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv.../comparefeatur
es.mspx

It describes the same limitation that Windows Server 2003 Standard has up
to four processors, regardless of the number of cores. In fact, there is no
limitation in the number of cores for Microsoft software.

Related information
=============
http://blogs.technet.com/labrat/

Hope this is cleanly.

Mike Luo

Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

=====================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Mike,

Thanks for your reply, but I am still not entirely clear.

I understand that Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition is licensed for up to
4 physical processors (whether they are all single core or all quad core.
However the Microsoft article you refer to says that Windows Server 2003
Standard Edition has "up to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) support".
To me that suggests that it will use a maximum of 4 cores even on a server
with 4 quad core processors. Or is my understanding incorrect? I confess to
not understanding exactly what the definition of 'symmetric multiprocessing'
is (even after reading the Wikipedia definition).

Adrian

"Mike Luo [MSFT]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:84ee%[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> Thank you for using newsgroup!
>
> Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can have up to four processors. For
> most currently shipping Microsoft software with processor limits, each
> processor counts as a single processor regardless of the number of cores
> and/or threads that the processor contains. For example, Windows Server
> 2003 Standard Edition can be used on a four-processor system, whether the
> processors in the system are single-core, hyperthreaded, or multicore.
>
> I have readed the following document:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv.../comparefeatur
> es.mspx
>
> It describes the same limitation that Windows Server 2003 Standard has up
> to four processors, regardless of the number of cores. In fact, there is
> no
> limitation in the number of cores for Microsoft software.
>
> Related information
> =============
> http://blogs.technet.com/labrat/
>
> Hope this is cleanly.
>
> Mike Luo
>
> Microsoft Online Partner Support
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>
> =====================================================
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> =====================================================
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
>

"Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike,
>
> Thanks for your reply, but I am still not entirely clear.
>
> I understand that Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition is licensed for up
> to 4 physical processors (whether they are all single core or all quad
> core. However the Microsoft article you refer to says that Windows Server
> 2003 Standard Edition has "up to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
> support". To me that suggests that it will use a maximum of 4 cores even
> on a server with 4 quad core processors. Or is my understanding incorrect?

I believe (but haven't checked) that this 4-processor limit is strictly a
LICENCING issue and not really related to the way the (thread)
scheduler works so the previous info you received about 4 physical
processors with as many cores as are present seems to make sense.

> I confess to not understanding exactly what the definition of 'symmetric
> multiprocessing' is (even after reading the Wikipedia definition).

It's very simple (so perhaps I should go and edit that article <grin>)....

Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) merely means that ANY thread can
run by default on ANY processor.

In asymmetric multiprocessing certain threads (usually the OS itself) get
their own processor(s) which cannot be shared by other processes even
when these (OS) threads aren't really using it.

Windows schedules threads onto each processor on a first come, first
served basis at any particular PRIORITY level. There are actually
32 such levels ( 0=idle to 16=lowest realtime, to 31=for only the most
critical threads) each with a (possibly empty) queue of threads waiting
to run.

The Scheduler goes down the priority levels and picks the higher priority,
first item and so on -- when a thread finishes with a CPU or is removed
due to "preemption" due to exhauding its "quantum" the scheduler sticks
that thread back at the END of the queue for the priority level in which it
is running.

Make sense? (IF not, maybe I shouldn't edit the Wikipedia <grin>)

--
Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
http://www.LearnQuick.Com
(phone on web site)

Herb,

Thanks,

>>It's very simple

So to simple me Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can legally be run on a
server with 4 quad core processors, but it will only use four of the sixteen
available cores. Or am I still confused ;)

Adrian

"Herb Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Mike,
>>
>> Thanks for your reply, but I am still not entirely clear.
>>
>> I understand that Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition is licensed for up
>> to 4 physical processors (whether they are all single core or all quad
>> core. However the Microsoft article you refer to says that Windows Server
>> 2003 Standard Edition has "up to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
>> support". To me that suggests that it will use a maximum of 4 cores even
>> on a server with 4 quad core processors. Or is my understanding
>> incorrect?
>
> I believe (but haven't checked) that this 4-processor limit is strictly a
> LICENCING issue and not really related to the way the (thread)
> scheduler works so the previous info you received about 4 physical
> processors with as many cores as are present seems to make sense.
>
>> I confess to not understanding exactly what the definition of 'symmetric
>> multiprocessing' is (even after reading the Wikipedia definition).
>
> It's very simple (so perhaps I should go and edit that article <grin>)....
>
> Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) merely means that ANY thread can
> run by default on ANY processor.
>
> In asymmetric multiprocessing certain threads (usually the OS itself) get
> their own processor(s) which cannot be shared by other processes even
> when these (OS) threads aren't really using it.
>
> Windows schedules threads onto each processor on a first come, first
> served basis at any particular PRIORITY level. There are actually
> 32 such levels ( 0=idle to 16=lowest realtime, to 31=for only the most
> critical threads) each with a (possibly empty) queue of threads waiting
> to run.
>
> The Scheduler goes down the priority levels and picks the higher priority,
> first item and so on -- when a thread finishes with a CPU or is removed
> due to "preemption" due to exhauding its "quantum" the scheduler sticks
> that thread back at the END of the queue for the priority level in which
> it
> is running.
>
> Make sense? (IF not, maybe I shouldn't edit the Wikipedia <grin>)
>
> --
> Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
> http://www.LearnQuick.Com
> (phone on web site)
>
>
>

"Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Herb,
>
> Thanks,
>
>>>It's very simple
>
> So to simple

Different subject -- I said SMP was simple.

> me Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can legally be run on a server
> with 4 quad core processors, but it will only use four of the sixteen
> available cores. Or am I still confused ;)

I don't think the above is accurate but haven't tested it. The previous
poster said it would use 4 PHYSICAL processors with whatever
cores they contain -- so I am assuming 16 in the case of 4x4.

Herb,

Thanks.

But if Microsoft says "has up to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
support" does that not mean it is only going to support 4 cores in total
(out of 16 for example if 4 quad core processors), or does it mean it will
support 4 cores PER processor?

Sorry to labour the point....

Adrian


"Herb Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Herb,
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>>It's very simple
>>
>> So to simple
>
> Different subject -- I said SMP was simple.
>
>> me Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can legally be run on a server
>> with 4 quad core processors, but it will only use four of the sixteen
>> available cores. Or am I still confused ;)
>
> I don't think the above is accurate but haven't tested it. The previous
> poster said it would use 4 PHYSICAL processors with whatever
> cores they contain -- so I am assuming 16 in the case of 4x4.
>
>
>

"Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Herb,
>
> Thanks.
>
> But if Microsoft says "has up to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing (SMP)
> support" does that not mean it is only going to support 4 cores in total
> (out of 16 for example if 4 quad core processors), or does it mean it will
> support 4 cores PER processor?
>
> Sorry to labour the point....

I have indicated that *I* do not know for sure that that is what Mike
said.

Do you have the machine? Have you tried it?

The 4-processors is mostlly a licensing issue so it is quite possible this
is going to work just fine as Mike indicated.

--
Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
http://www.LearnQuick.Com
(phone on web site)

Herb,

Thanks.

> Do you have the machine? Have you tried it?
> The 4-processors is mostlly a licensing issue so it is quite possible this
> is going to work just fine as Mike indicated.

We are looking to purchase one, and we are trying to decide whether we
should buy 2 dual core processors or consider buying 2 quad core processors.
We are a small company so do not have the finance to have test servers etc.

Adrian

"Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> Herb,
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Do you have the machine? Have you tried it?
>> The 4-processors is mostlly a licensing issue so it is quite possible
>> this
>> is going to work just fine as Mike indicated.
>
> We are looking to purchase one, and we are trying to decide whether we
> should buy 2 dual core processors or consider buying 2 quad core
> processors. We are a small company so do not have the finance to have test
> servers etc.

Try asking the vendor -- will they be selling you Windows Server with the
hardware?

Or call your local Microsoft sales office (most large US Cities have one)
and ask.

You have the case of 2 x 4.

BTW, what are you going to do with a 2 x 4 server?

--
Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
http://www.LearnQuick.Com
(phone on web site)

"Herb Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>
> "Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
>> Herb,
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>> Do you have the machine? Have you tried it?
>>> The 4-processors is mostlly a licensing issue so it is quite possible
>>> this
>>> is going to work just fine as Mike indicated.
>>
>> We are looking to purchase one, and we are trying to decide whether we
>> should buy 2 dual core processors or consider buying 2 quad core
>> processors. We are a small company so do not have the finance to have
>> test servers etc.
>
> Try asking the vendor -- will they be selling you Windows Server with the
> hardware?
>
> Or call your local Microsoft sales office (most large US Cities have one)
> and ask.
>
> You have the case of 2 x 4.
>
> BTW, what are you going to do with a 2 x 4 server?
>
> --
> Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
> http://www.LearnQuick.Com
> (phone on web site)
>

Herb,

Thanks.

I have rung Microsoft (in the UK) and they did not know! They have said they
will get back to me.

Our vendors think it will use a maximum of 4 cores.

We plan to use it mainly for Exchange 2007, accounting software, & file
server. I am sure 2 dual core Xeons will be plenty, but I would like to know
as 2 quad cores is probably not much more expensive (depending on the type).
We have about 30 users.

Adrian

Thanks Herb.

Hi Adrian,

If you install 4-way symmetric multiprocessing processors which contains 4
cores, that also is supported; you only purchase 4 CPUs' license. But if
you upgrade single processor system to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing
processors, you need to purchase additional license.

Hope this helps.

Mike Luo

Microsoft Online Partner Support
Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

=====================================================
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
=====================================================
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

"Mike Luo [MSFT]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thanks Herb.
>
> Hi Adrian,
>
> If you install 4-way symmetric multiprocessing processors which contains 4
> cores, that also is supported; you only purchase 4 CPUs' license. But if
> you upgrade single processor system to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing
> processors, you need to purchase additional license.

No, that confused me (again.)


Ok:

4 CPU license
4 Physical CPUs
4 Cores PER CPU

Does he get to use them all this way?


Or only one CPU with 4 cores with a 4-CPU license?


--
Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
http://www.LearnQuick.Com
(phone on web site)

"Herb Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mike Luo [MSFT]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Thanks Herb.
>>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> If you install 4-way symmetric multiprocessing processors which contains
>> 4
>> cores, that also is supported; you only purchase 4 CPUs' license. But if
>> you upgrade single processor system to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing
>> processors, you need to purchase additional license.
>
> No, that confused me (again.)

And me ;)

It is not really the licensing I was asking about the maximum number of
cores that Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition can USE.

If I have a server with 4 quad core processors & install Windows Server 2003
Standard Edition will Windows Server use:

a) All 16 cores

b) Only 4 cores

If it is possible to answer "a" or "b" that would be great. I can understand
that!

Adrian

"Herb Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mike Luo [MSFT]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Thanks Herb.
>>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> If you install 4-way symmetric multiprocessing processors which contains
>> 4
>> cores, that also is supported; you only purchase 4 CPUs' license. But if
>> you upgrade single processor system to 4-way symmetric multiprocessing
>> processors, you need to purchase additional license.
>
> No, that confused me (again.)
>
>
> Ok:
>
> 4 CPU license
> 4 Physical CPUs
> 4 Cores PER CPU
>
> Does he get to use them all this way?
>
>
> Or only one CPU with 4 cores with a 4-CPU license?
>
>
> --
> Herb Martin, MCSE, MVP
> http://www.LearnQuick.Com
> (phone on web site)
>

Herb,

Below is the reply I received from Microsoft. I think that makes it clear!

"Thank you for your query on Windows Server 2003 Standard with dual core
processors, I have detailed this below for your reference.

Windows Server 2003 standard use Dual core processors. Windows Server 2003
ST 64 bit can be installed unto a machine with up to 4 processors; please
confirm if Windows Server was put unto a machine with a dual Core processor
whether it would use up all 8 processors or not?

Answer:

Windows Server is licensed per physical processor, irrespective of how many
cores are on the processor.

Standard Edition Windows support 4 processors. These processors can be
single, dual or quad core today. Windows will use all cores on all
processors that it supports.

For example, if a server has 4 processors, and each is dual core, the
customer can install Windows Server Standard Edition and it will use all 8
cores. Task manager will show 8 CPUS and applications can leverage all 8 .

Another example, if the server had 4 Quad Core CPU's installed, then the
customer could install Windows Server Standard edition and use all 16 cores.

I hope this is useful for you, please let me know if you need anything
further."

Adrian