WHY do experts say use XEONs for server set-up?

[Guest]

Why are XEONs so great for building an INTEL server?

What is the best Intel Pentium based server set-up?

To build a server, what would you recommend going with an Intel set-up?

Mobo:
CPU:
RAM:
HD:
CASE:
WATT SUPPLY:
# of FANS:
S CARD:
V CARD:
MISC:

 

[peteb]

I'd usually recommend buying one from Dell or Compaq and getting the support and warranty unless you want to have to wake up at 3 in the morning and rebuild the thing because of a hardware failure.

If this is really a low criticality environment then you can consider self build - but just be aware of the support implications and comeback (you).

-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details

 

[Guest]

...Intel Pentium based web server set-up?

To build a server, what would you recommend going with an Intel set-up?

Mobo:
CPU:
RAM:
HD:
CASE:
WATT SUPPLY:
# of FANS:
S CARD:
V CARD:
MISC:

 

[peteb]

Mobo: How much load on your site?
CPU: How much load on your site?
RAM: How much load on your site?
HD: How much data on your site?
CASE: Almost irrelevant - is it rackmount?
WATT SUPPLY: How many peripherals? 400W+
# of FANS: 2 or more if many hdds.
S CARD: No
V CARD: 8Mb PCI Matrox or similar.
MISC: Floppy, CD (RW?), NIC (3Com), keyboard, mouse, monitor (15" tube).



-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details

 

[girish]

<b>Why are XEONs so great for building an INTEL server? </b>
they have huge of 1 MB or 2 MB cache that and they are scalable with 2~8 way multiprocessing for high end servers, but looking at the price I doubt they are any worth for small to even mid level server applications. P-III servers would offer similar performance at much lower cost.

<b>What is the best Intel Pentium based server set-up?
To build a server, what would you recommend going with an Intel set-up?</b>

<b>Mobo:</b> Intel STL2 server board with Serverworks LE chipset
<b>CPU:</b> One or two Intel Pentium-III 866 or 933 MHz processors
<b>RAM:</b> 256~512 MB PC133 ECC SDRAM
<b>HD:</b> Seagate Cheetah 18.2 GB or 36.5 GB SCSI Ultra160 disks, recommended is hardware RAID with AMI MegaRAID or similar card at least RAID 1 for data security. the case also has a Hot swap kit option for Hot swap LVD SCSI disks. STL2 has onboard Adaptec 7899 dual channel SCSI controller.
<b>CASE:</b> Intel SC5000 is good, can be pedestal as well as rack mount.
<b>WATT SUPPLY:</b> the SC5000 has inbuilt 350 W hot swap power supply with an option for a redundant one. you might want to go for a 450 W one.
<b># of FANS:</b> 4~6
<b>S CARD:</b> why do you need it on a server?
<b>V CARD:</b> onboard ATI Rage II with 4 MB dedicated SGRAM
<b>MISC:</b> The board has onboard Intel 82559 LAN adapter. A 1.44 MB Floppy drive, Asus 50X CD-ROM, <font color=red>OS:</font color=red> Windows 2000 Advanced Server? Redhat 7.1 Linux Server works great!
<font color=red>Console:</font color=red> you dont not need it but it might be a good idea to have a simple 104 keyboard, a logitech mouse and a 14" colour (even mono will do) monitor for server monitoring and maintainence jobs.

of course the finer details are depend on the application.

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>

 

[killall]

4 itaniums... thats already over 12 grand... a few gigs of ram... uhm yeh thats it... intel... best servers... right... dont even try running windows on your server... microsoft have been trying to make the switch to nt ever since they bought hotmail, every time theres an outage theyre trying to use windows again instead of bsd on which the non msoft hotmail was based... and still is!

if in doubt blame microsoft...

 

[8procstooslow]

Intel based servers are cheap if you compare them to the likes of HP/IBM (RS6000, AS400), SUN or Alpha based servers.
Why are they still more expensive than regular desktop chips. Supply and demand being one factor. Alot of testing goes on before the chips are shiped and in multi processor setups they have to be matched. And companies are willing to pay that kind of money as there is usually quite a high return on investment with the applications involved

 

[killall]

how about 64 durons @ 1ghz with around 256 megs of ram each for quite a bit cheaper? sweet setup... just use linux and set them up in a cluster... much higher performance...

if in doubt blame microsoft...

 

[8procstooslow]

Business applications (databases) generally can not make much use of a cluster other than for hot switching/ standby systems. They usually require lots of processing power on the same machine. Yes Oracle does offer parallel server but the cost is much higher than a large intel based server (16way). Also from a management point of view, one server is a lot easier to manage than lots of small ones plus space is usually an issue.

 

[killall]

use linux... its free...

if in doubt blame microsoft...

 

[wapaaga]

not to start a flame war here but you might want to also take a look at the amd solutions out

here is a link to a new server that anandtech just put int

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1514" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1514</A>

<font color=red>Gasoline + Fire</font color=red><font color=green> Can be a lot of fun</font color=green>