Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel vs AMD for Virtualization (home lab)

Last response: in Systems
Share
March 19, 2013 8:40:34 AM

I wanted to buy a LGA1055 motherboard and an Inter Ivy Bridge CPU, but there is a limit by the processor for the maximum memory support to 32GB. AMD has no problem with that limitation.

Any pros and cons for the virtualization on the AMD vs Intel platform?
March 19, 2013 8:50:31 AM

remusrigo said:
I wanted to buy a LGA1055 motherboard and an Inter Ivy Bridge CPU, but there is a limit by the processor for the maximum memory support to 32GB. AMD has no problem with that limitation.

Any pros and cons for the virtualization on the AMD vs Intel platform?


How many Virtual PCs do you intend to run and how heavily utilized will they be? I've played with HyperV on a PC running Windows Server 2012 with an i7 IB CPU and 16 GB of RAM without any issues while limiting each PC to around 1.5 GB of RAM. These were PCs in a test lab though and therefore didn't need maximum performance for 24/7 uptime. What are your intended uses?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
March 19, 2013 9:05:42 AM

AMD has typically been better for virtualization. AMD's processors are slower architecture than Intel's, but their dedicated CPU cores, large amounts of cache, and drivers specialized for professional applications have traditionally made them better for business related activities. They're also cheaper.
Where as Intel is better at anything a home user would want (gaming and simple applications).
m
0
l
Related resources
a b å Intel
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
March 19, 2013 9:15:37 AM

?? Max memory support is not normally limited by the processor (CPU), as there are users that apparently are running with 48 gigs installed.

I think the max memory limit is based on the MB, ie Nr of slots x max size supported by slot and OS. For example 4 slots and if MB only supported up to 4 gig modules then max allowed would be 16 gigs, but if max per slot was 8 then 32 would be max. With the New 16 gig modules that goes to 64 gigs - BUT MB must support 16 gig modules.

For OS: example uSoft in there infinite wisdom put a ceiling of ONLY 16 gigs for Win 7 Premium

Quote from: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/313665-30-48gb
i'd like to update this - I installed 48GB (G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 1333mhz) on my i7 920 EX58-UD5 machine today, and it is working fine! Windows recognises the RAM correctly and its working very well even not "officially" supported.
m
0
l
March 19, 2013 9:44:21 AM

RetiredChief said:
?? Max memory support is not normally limited by the processor (CPU), as there are users that apparently are running with 48 gigs installed.

I think the max memory limit is based on the MB, ie Nr of slots x max size supported by slot and OS. For example 4 slots and if MB only supported up to 4 gig modules then max allowed would be 16 gigs, but if max per slot was 8 then 32 would be max. With the New 16 gig modules that goes to 64 gigs - BUT MB must support 16 gig modules.

For OS: example uSoft in there infinite wisdom put a ceiling of ONLY 16 gigs for Win 7 Premium

Quote from: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/313665-30-48gb
i'd like to update this - I installed 48GB (G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 1333mhz) on my i7 920 EX58-UD5 machine today, and it is working fine! Windows recognises the RAM correctly and its working very well even not "officially" supported.


Take a look at Intel's Processor specifications. Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge processors are limited to 32 GB max memory. Sandy Bridge E processors are limited to 64 GB max memory. Xeon Processors can get up to 2 TB of max memory.

That's not to say it is guaranteed to be impossible to run more, simply that Intels specifically states that those are the maximum amounts of memory each processor supports.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
March 19, 2013 11:34:41 AM

I've seen Sandy Bridge E system susing 3930Ks and 3960Xs with 128GB of memory (8x16GB), so they most certainly can support more than 64GB no matter what Intel says.
m
0
l
!