Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How stable are Athlon 64x2 4200+, 5000+ processors?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 10, 2006 8:01:33 AM

Hi all,

I want to build a server using an Athlon 64x2 4200+ or 5000+ processor.
The server has to be available 24/7 as it will host some web app written in java and a database server (PostgreSql).

How stable are these processors comparing to Intel ones (Pentium D, Core 2 Duo)?

The server has to be as fast as possible and the budget is about 800 EUR
(I need 2 GB RAM at least DDR2 533, 320 GB HDD).

Thanks in advance.
October 10, 2006 8:08:34 AM

I haven't ever seen a CPU run unreliably at stock speed (that hasn't been damaged, of course). Something else is going to give way before the CPU takes a misstep.

Depends on your memory, if it's not ECC, expect a single bit error every month.
October 10, 2006 9:19:23 AM

I have asked this question because I friend of mine told me that, based on his experience, he had more stability problems with AMD systems than with Intel ones.
He wasn't sure though that the CPU was causing the problems...
Related resources
October 10, 2006 10:16:10 AM

stock cpus are rock solid(intel and amd).the problems come from memory mainly so if you want a real server then you need a server mobo that takes registered memory.
October 10, 2006 10:20:23 AM

Quote:
I have asked this question because I friend of mine told me that, based on his experience, he had more stability problems with AMD systems than with Intel ones.
He wasn't sure though that the CPU was causing the problems...


Sounds like a load of rubbish :p , unless he was running win95, but thats not the cpu's problem :) 

If you're buying DDR2, then you're buying AM2, which is a waste of money. Go down the core2duo road. They will run a lot cooler too. A E6300 will be cheaper than both of the AMD cpu's and run faster (considerably so if you fancy overclocking)
October 10, 2006 10:45:13 AM

Quote:
I have asked this question because I friend of mine told me that, based on his experience, he had more stability problems with AMD systems than with Intel ones.
He wasn't sure though that the CPU was causing the problems...




This is absolutely false!

AMD systems are just as reliable as Intel systems if not more so.

If you use crappy components your server will suck regardless of whether it is AMD, Intel, IBM, Motorola, Sun or whatever.

With good components any architecture will work reliably.

If you use an nVidia nForce chipset, a good motherboard ( ASUS, DFI, Tyan, etc ), good RAM ( corsair, OCZ, crucial ), PSU ( Antec, PC Power & Cooling, OCZ, Silverstone, etc ) you'll be fine.

GL :-D
October 10, 2006 11:34:13 AM

Quote:
I have asked this question because I friend of mine told me that, based on his experience, he had more stability problems with AMD systems than with Intel ones.
He wasn't sure though that the CPU was causing the problems...




This is absolutely false!

AMD systems are just as reliable as Intel systems if not more so.

If you use crappy components your server will suck regardless of whether it is AMD, Intel, IBM, Motorola, Sun or whatever.

With good components any architecture will work reliably.

If you use an nVidia nForce chipset, a good motherboard ( ASUS, DFI, Tyan, etc ), good RAM ( corsair, OCZ, crucial ), PSU ( Antec, PC Power & Cooling, OCZ, Silverstone, etc ) you'll be fine.

GL :-D

i agree..and i also consider that most of the problems concerning stability cames from the system memory...
intel has indeed a better position in this sector .. mainly because of their mobos..
cpu has nothing to do with this what so ever.....
October 10, 2006 12:07:29 PM

tbh... stability is not about cpu´s these days...

If you really wanna have a stable system you have to avoid microcrap OS´ ;-)
October 10, 2006 12:34:25 PM

How much data will it serve????

A bit of java and database? This sounds like complete overkill!!

For a complete production enviro build you need a backup box. This will only guarantee 99.9% uptime.

I would despec and build two boxes unless this will be your only rig.

Regards
a c 99 à CPUs
October 10, 2006 12:52:22 PM

My Athlon 64 X2 4200+, albeit in Socket 939 format with DDR RAM instead of your proposed socket AM2 chip that uses DDR2. It is as stable as a rock and runs cool and quiet as I have it on 24/7 running Folding@Home at 100% on both cores. These chips are excellent and I highly recommend them. I have not used a Core 2 Duo machine, but I have used a pair of NetBurst single-core Xeons and also Pentium Ds. The Xeons were reliable and ran relatively cool, but the fans were very noisy and the chips not all that fast compared to AMD's. The Pentium D box that I used was a Pentium D 820 and I could *not* recommend that for a server that's going to be on 24/7. The chip runs very hot and if you put much of an extended load on it, it will overheat and throttle unless you put one mother of a heatsink on there. The chip was also significantly slower than the AMD dual-core units.

I suggest that you go with DDR2-800 RAM instead of DDR2-533 as that's what the chips are rated for. I also suggest that you run Linux as your OS as it tends to do much better in a server role than Windows does (especially XP, which is not a server OS.)
October 10, 2006 12:55:13 PM

It will use Tomcat 5.5, Hibernate 3, Postgresql 8.1.
I expect about 30 simultaneous connections, database has about 100 tables.
The OS will be Linux or Solaris x86 (I have to do some benchmarks to see which one performs better).

Is this config an overkill for what I want to do?

Thanks.
October 10, 2006 3:10:14 PM

Quote:
It will use Tomcat 5.5, Hibernate 3, Postgresql 8.1.
I expect about 30 simultaneous connections, database has about 100 tables.
The OS will be Linux or Solaris x86 (I have to do some benchmarks to see which one performs better).

Is this config an overkill for what I want to do?

Thanks.




I would recommend any AMD64 CPU ( 939 or AM2 ) either single core or Dual Core and Linux x86_64 which is 25-75% faster in 64bit mode vs 32bit mode.

1GB RAM or more ( installed in pairs for Dual Channel ) and an nForce 4 or 5 chipset.

See the benchmarks below:

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163

AMD64s perform very well running MySQL or postgreSQL ( Important Note LOWER IS BETTER in the database tests )

:-D
a b à CPUs
October 10, 2006 9:36:29 PM

Quote:
I have asked this question because I friend of mine told me that, based on his experience, he had more stability problems with AMD systems than with Intel ones.
He wasn't sure though that the CPU was causing the problems...




This is absolutely false!

AMD systems are just as reliable as Intel systems if not more so.

If you use crappy components your server will suck regardless of whether it is AMD, Intel, IBM, Motorola, Sun or whatever.

With good components any architecture will work reliably.

If you use an nVidia nForce chipset, a good motherboard ( ASUS, DFI, Tyan, etc ), good RAM ( corsair, OCZ, crucial ), PSU ( Antec, PC Power & Cooling, OCZ, Silverstone, etc ) you'll be fine.

GL :-D

Umm no,

It's not false but it's also not true. IT all depends on the hardware used.

AMD processors are no less stable then Intel processors. Neither is more so then the other (quit the fanboyism will ya!).

Stability issues arise from the platform. Nforce4 is NOT a stable chipset. meaning that under most usages it's quite decent but nForce platforms do crash and they do so quite often varying on the components occupying the PCI slots. (there are more documented incompatibilities with nForce chipsets then Intel chipsets like there are only around 50 or so documented incompatibilities with Intel Chipsets since the beginning of there existance... I won't even begin to mention how many incompatibilities exist just for the nForce3/4 alone).

This will be changing though, with the purchase of ATi, expect AMD to have there own VERY stable platform.

Now the only reason I bring this up is because my file server (Sempron64) does crash from time to time (due to the nForce3 chipset). It seems that having a few SATA controllers on the PCI slots sometimes ends up overloading the system with Info all at once and it hangs.

Don't have that issue with my Intel chipset based server.

Again.. AMD is not to blame, nVIDIA are. If you're not adding multiple SATA RAID controllers then you should be ok.

Also memory plays a BIG role. It's always good to buy namebrand memory.

Another important aspect is the O/S used. some operating systems are more stable then others.
October 10, 2006 10:07:35 PM

Quote:
Hi all,

I want to build a server using an Athlon 64x2 4200+ or 5000+ processor.
The server has to be available 24/7 as it will host some web app written in java and a database server (PostgreSql).

How stable are these processors comparing to Intel ones (Pentium D, Core 2 Duo)?

The server has to be as fast as possible and the budget is about 800 EUR
(I need 2 GB RAM at least DDR2 533, 320 GB HDD).

Thanks in advance.


They're very stable, but for a server use an Opteron instead.
!