• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Server Processor. Which to use?

A

abudhu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
1,653
I will be setting up a File-Server/Possible Web-server in the next few months. Watching prices and debating with myself in the meantime. In anycase, I posted another thread asking different questions, but I was lucky and my work place threw an "old" 1U Server Rackmount my way. Woohoo. Finding a heatsink for a 1U System is a pain in the ass so if you guys can find me one that'd be awesome.

Anywho, my question is. This File/Web-Server should see a constant usuage of 10 people everyday via VPN. They will be moving large video files and I will perhaps be using it as a network rendering machine.

So, if you had a choice, which would you pick:

Celeron D 2.6Ghz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819112193

Or

P4 3.0Ghz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116200

Its a big price difference. And my budget is around 500 dollars. The current system I have priced uses the P4. However, the more I think about the more the Celeron seems like the smarter choice. As I could always upgrade later and seems to offer what I need.

Thoughts?
 
abudhu said:
I will be setting up a File-Server/Possible Web-server in the next few months. Watching prices and debating with myself in the meantime. In anycase, I posted another thread asking different questions, but I was lucky and my work place threw an "old" 1U Server Rackmount my way. Woohoo. Finding a heatsink for a 1U System is a pain in the ass so if you guys can find me one that'd be awesome.

Anywho, my question is. This File/Web-Server should see a constant usuage of 10 people everyday via VPN. They will be moving large video files and I will perhaps be using it as a network rendering machine.

So, if you had a choice, which would you pick:

Celeron D 2.6Ghz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819112193

Or

P4 3.0Ghz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116200

Its a big price difference. And my budget is around 500 dollars. The current system I have priced uses the P4. However, the more I think about the more the Celeron seems like the smarter choice. As I could always upgrade later and seems to offer what I need.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


Celeron and server don't belong in the same sentence....PERIOD. not even a workstation.
 
This is just my experience but I will never buy another Celeron for any of my servers ever again. They are for cheap desktops, not servers. That is what I have observed through my experiences.
 
Haha, Alright. Well its not a Server Server. Just for workmates, friends. Anywho, so P4 it is. Xeons are hella expensive, and like I said budget = 500 dollars = Cheap Server.

Now, the thing is, since I have that Free 1U Rackmount, finding a Heatsink for it is Incredibly hard. All the ones on newegg support up to a 2.6/2.8P4 but not 3.0. I wouldn't want to risk buying one that wouldn't cool it adequetly.


Any help locating a 1U Heatsink for the P4 then?
 
abudhu said:
Haha, Alright. Well its not a Server Server. Just for workmates, friends. Anywho, so P4 it is. Xeons are hella expensive, and like I said budget = 500 dollars = Cheap Server.

Now, the thing is, since I have that Free 1U Rackmount, finding a Heatsink for it is Incredibly hard. All the ones on newegg support up to a 2.6/2.8P4 but not 3.0. I wouldn't want to risk buying one that wouldn't cool it adequetly.


Any help locating a 1U Heatsink for the P4 then?
Click to expand...

It really won't matter about that. Just get one rated for a 2.8, and you will be OK.
 
A fileserver isn't bad with a celeron. It doesn't take a lot of power to serve files up.

If you want to consider doing anything else with it though, get the P4. Athlon XPs also make decent servers if you're going for dirt cheap. I use a 2800+ for our webserver at work that sees about 2K unique hits a day and it runs fine.
 
Celeron processors work fine. I have one sitting in a server in my network here, with three workstations, a main server (celeron), file server (dual p3's), a firewall computer and two printers. I add computers on to the network when I am servicing them. Not a problem yet. I will upgrade the CPU when the right deal comes along, but it is servicing me fine so far.
 
Score. Well it seems like a split issue. Some of you are saying P4, and others Celeron. I am begining to think the P4 would be the better route IF I was using this server intensely, loads of traffic, and doing many things. But like others have said, file-servers are not demanding, which makes me feel the Celeron is the better choice.

If indeed the Celeron for this small file-server is the better choice, what would be the amd =alivent of it (At least in the same 80-85 dollar price rage that Celeron is in)?

Right now I have 3 systems priced at:
595 (P4 3.0)

505 (Celeron 2.6)

560 (P4 2.6)

Seeing as I am trying to stay close to 500 the celeron seems the best choice.
Continue offering advice. :)
 
abudhu said:
Score. Well it seems like a split issue. Some of you are saying P4, and others Celeron. I am begining to think the P4 would be the better route IF I was using this server intensely, loads of traffic, and doing many things. But like others have said, file-servers are not demanding, which makes me feel the Celeron is the better choice.

If indeed the Celeron for this small file-server is the better choice, what would be the amd =alivent of it (At least in the same 80-85 dollar price rage that Celeron is in)?

Right now I have 3 systems priced at:
595 (P4 3.0)

505 (Celeron 2.6)

560 (P4 2.6)

Seeing as I am trying to stay close to 500 the celeron seems the best choice.
Continue offering advice. :)
Click to expand...
\

Save yourself some time and spend the extra $55.
 
VPN and large video files arent really....yeah. Unless your clients, (not to mention your server) have some really crazy-ass internet connections.
 
Really, really depends on the load, the servers, the OS and the like.
People have run fileservers on sub-GHz machines for years. A lowly apache/ftp/samba - box would probably run fine on a P3 933.
However, if you're planning to use it as a rendering node as well, it's likely to be worth it to pay a bit extra and get the P4.

Another possibility would be getting something with Socket A. There's some nice clearance prices on it, and both the last Socket A Athlon XPs and the Semprons should be decent enough. I don't want to quote prices, though, as my local prices are not likely to match yours.
(The Semprons are supposedly cooler than the comparable celerons, if I can believe Tom's.)
 
You can cook a nice meal on an Athlon XP processor... Grill up a nice 10oz striploin steak.. Sizzle up a handful of mushrooms... Throw on a pot of water and poach yourself a couple of eggs. Makes for a great breakfast.

If you have a high ambient temperature environment, or this server is going to be on 24/7 with a heavy duty cycle forget Axps.

Intel processors do MUCH better in all of the aforementioned environments than an AthlonXP. I've been through my personal hell with those scrappiles. If you are going to go AMD, look into the A64 or Opteron. Dual Opteron servers are actually pretty decent.
 
SirKenin said:
You can cook a nice meal on an Athlon XP processor... Grill up a nice 10oz striploin steak.. Sizzle up a handful of mushrooms... Throw on a pot of water and poach yourself a couple of eggs. Makes for a great breakfast.

If you have a high ambient temperature environment, or this server is going to be on 24/7 with a heavy duty cycle forget Axps.

Intel processors do MUCH better in all of the aforementioned environments than an AthlonXP. I've been through my personal hell with those scrappiles. If you are going to go AMD, look into the A64 or Opteron. Dual Opteron servers are actually pretty decent.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? The highest output stock Athlon XP(3200+) is 76.8W.

Intel is considerably higher in the P4 line. A 3.0D Northwood core is 99W. A Prescott 3.6D can pull a monster 151W, almost double the highest Athlon XP core.

http://www.sandpile.org/impl/p4.htm
http://www.sandpile.org/impl/k7.htm
 
sandmanx said:
What the hell are you talking about? The highest output stock Athlon XP(3200+) is 76.8W.

Intel is considerably higher in the P4 line. A 3.0D Northwood core is 99W. A Prescott 3.6D can pull a monster 151W, almost double the highest Athlon XP core.

http://www.sandpile.org/impl/p4.htm
http://www.sandpile.org/impl/k7.htm
Click to expand...

What I am talking about is very simple. I don't care what the wattages are, a P4 can withstand much higher ambient temperatures and can operate around the clock under heavy load much MUCH better than the Axp can. The Axp simply locks up. Trust me, I know. I don't need charts. I have plenty of experience with them. I've been doing this for 18 years. A P4, when it is in trouble, will throttle down but stay running. In my network I have three P4s and a Celeron server that stay running around the clock, 365 days a year. They are quite often put under load when I beat them up with some good gaming and they don't lock up. Axps do. Simple as that. Axp is NOT a server processor, nor even a viable alternative for a heavily loaded workstation. They are good for the enthusiast, but that is about it.

They do get VERY warm, enough to heat up a small room. I grant that the Prescott does too, I have one, but at least it can take what it dishes out, unlike the Axp.
 
Alrighty. I suppose I'll just be watching the prices now. Gosh darn things being expenisve. Should be fun to build. I have Win2K3 Server running on an old Athlon 700Mhz computer right now. Trying to figure out how things work. Can't seem to find my internal IP though. Any thoughts on this? Everytime I do ipconfig /all it returns the static IP I assigned to it. If I go to canyouseeme.org It gives me the internal IP of the Router. Very annoying. I USED to be able to plug my ethernet straight into my cable box and get my Internal IP that way, but for some reason both Win2k3 and XPx64 don't seem to like that and never connect me to the internet. Pissing me off really. I am pretty freaking sure I am going to need to internal IP of my machine if I am going to get any sort of File Server/Web Server going.

Bloody annoying. Thoughts?
 
SirKenin said:
What I am talking about is very simple. I don't care what the wattages are, a P4 can withstand much higher ambient temperatures and can operate around the clock under heavy load much MUCH better than the Axp can. The Axp simply locks up. Trust me, I know. I don't need charts. I have plenty of experience with them. I've been doing this for 18 years. A P4, when it is in trouble, will throttle down but stay running. In my network I have three P4s and a Celeron server that stay running around the clock, 365 days a year. They are quite often put under load when I beat them up with some good gaming and they don't lock up. Axps do. Simple as that. Axp is NOT a server processor, nor even a viable alternative for a heavily loaded workstation. They are good for the enthusiast, but that is about it.

They do get VERY warm, enough to heat up a small room. I grant that the Prescott does too, I have one, but at least it can take what it dishes out, unlike the Axp.
Click to expand...
Typcial pretentiousness. Take it to forumdisplay.php?f=5.

With a decent enough heatsink, an AXP system can be just fine in hot and bothered environments. When was the last time that you had a P4 system "in trouble?" Do you run a kerosene heater where your systems are in the middle of August?

My 1700+@2.2GHz+1.65v runs 24/7/365 and never breaks 30*F, so in short your experiences are not everybody's. Imagine that. :rolleyes:

If your experiences with an AXP system were horrible then I am sorry, but it wasn't the processor's fault, most likely PEBKAC or even *gasp* crappy ass chipsets.
 
"I don't care about wattages" Heh.
In my experience Athlon based servers ARE less reliable, however, as someone pointed it out, it was always in the case of crappy chipsets.

I had a NF2 based server running solid under full load for over 5 months with no reboots, crashes, or errors. We wont even get into how stable my Opteron rig is, and how it spanks anything Intel has out currently.

Point is, if you're looking to cut costs, AMD is a very smart alternative to P4's, just be sure you're getting a quality motherboard/chipset combo.
 
Opteron=pwns all

Oh, he said cheap. Never mind. I will exit the thread now.
 
Yeah, that was my first thought too, but price is a big factor in his decision.
 
feigned said:
Typcial pretentiousness. Take it to forumdisplay.php?f=5.

With a decent enough heatsink, an AXP system can be just fine in hot and bothered environments. When was the last time that you had a P4 system "in trouble?" Do you run a kerosene heater where your systems are in the middle of August?

My 1700+@2.2GHz+1.65v runs 24/7/365 and never breaks 30*F, so in short your experiences are not everybody's. Imagine that. :rolleyes:

If your experiences with an AXP system were horrible then I am sorry, but it wasn't the processor's fault, most likely PEBKAC or even *gasp* crappy ass chipsets.
Click to expand...
One particular experience I remember was with an 1800+ running on an A7V266-e w/RAID and a $120 Swiftech 462a HSF. That was pretty much the top of the line mobo and HSF for that CPU at the time and that processor locked up constantly in my environment. I hated it. That was just one experience. In the same environment my P4s run 24/7 with no crashing.

Anyways, you guys are entitled to your opinions. I have had enough experiences with them that I am comfortable with my position, but you will either believe me or not. It doesn't matter to me.
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Opteron=pwns all

Oh, he said cheap. Never mind. I will exit the thread now.
Click to expand...
I've worked with Opterons. They are nice :)
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Opteron=pwns all

Oh, he said cheap. Never mind. I will exit the thread now.
Click to expand...

Haha. Agreed. But like you said, and I said $$ is the issue. I would GLADLY get the opteron if everything for it weren't so damn expensive :(
 
If the server is mostly moving data, which it is if it is a fileserver with no software RAID-5 and a webserver with no active page building on the fly, then a Celeron will be fine.

Everybody who says you need a P4 over a Celeron for those duties will have to admit that applying that actually logic leads to an Opteron, not a P4 ;)
 
No matter what CPU you choose, make sure your disk sub-system is up to par. Nothing cripples a server more that a slow set of disks or a crappy RAID setup.
 
I have never, and will never use a Celeron for a server BUT, if they are sooooo awful as a server processor, then why is Dell selling them as such?? Just a thought.

QJ
 
alienb said:
SirKenin, you named a VIA based motherboard, which was your problem;)
Click to expand...
That was the best available for them at the time. nVIDIA hadn't entered the market yet. And I agree. VIA is SHIT. SHIT SHIT SHIT.

Everyone catch that? :p
 
SirKenin said:
That was the best available for them at the time. nVIDIA hadn't entered the market yet. And I agree. VIA is SHIT. SHIT SHIT SHIT.

Everyone catch that? :p
Click to expand...

I recently upgraded my server by replacing the nForce2-based MB with a VIA-based one. Haven't been happier about an upgrade for many years.
(VIA have had many bad moments, but the nForce2 is the worst I've used yet. Unsupported, undocumented, flaky. I'd ritually burn it it I didn't have another AthlonXP stashed away somewhere.)

This is seen from a FreeBSD POV, though. Things might be different with the windows drivers involved.
 
HHunt said:
I recently upgraded my server by replacing the nForce2-based MB with a VIA-based one. Haven't been happier about an upgrade for many years.
(VIA have had many bad moments, but the nForce2 is the worst I've used yet. Unsupported, undocumented, flaky. I'd ritually burn it it I didn't have another AthlonXP stashed away somewhere.)
Click to expand...
It's the nVIDIA 3 you want. I have heard that 4 has issues too. VIA blows. Or did I say that already? If you got lucky, I'm very happy for you. Good luck with it.
 
SirKenin said:
It's the nVIDIA 3 you want. I have heard that 4 has issues too. VIA blows. Or did I say that already? If you got lucky, I'm very happy for you. Good luck with it.
Click to expand...

Don't doubt it, but it wasn't out when I bought the original card. (The VIA-based one I've got is roughly the same design age, FWIW.)
"Lucky" might be the word, but the FreeBSD drivers for VIA cards really do seem to work very well. Probably because they're very common, so they get a lot of testing (and developers). The nForce3 has middling (at best) driver support in comparisation.

The best still seems to be intel chipsets, though. Even as a general AMD fan I can appreciate that. (For historical reasons, my main computer is a xeon on an intel E7505 chipset-based MB.)
 
SirKenin said:
It's the nVIDIA 3 you want. I have heard that 4 has issues too. VIA blows. Or did I say that already? If you got lucky, I'm very happy for you. Good luck with it.
Click to expand...
A lot of problems with the K5's were because of the crappy ass chipsets they ran on as well, let's not forget that. NT4 SP6a anyone? It just won't happen on one of those setups.

There's good and there's bad, you had the bad. One day maybe you can reevaluate your stance on AMD CPUs. :)
 
SirKenin said:
That was the best available for them at the time. nVIDIA hadn't entered the market yet. And I agree. VIA is SHIT. SHIT SHIT SHIT.

Everyone catch that? :p
Click to expand...

Yeah, the KT133, KT133a, KT266, and KT266a where some shitty chipsets. I had a board based on the KT333 that was rock solid though, and later moved on to Nforce and Nforce2 chipsets. I've never had any stability problems on those boards, but I remember the hell a friend of mine had with his KT133a board. I personally used AMD chipsets before the KT333 came out.
 
HHunt said:
I recently upgraded my server by replacing the nForce2-based MB with a VIA-based one. Haven't been happier about an upgrade for many years.
(VIA have had many bad moments, but the nForce2 is the worst I've used yet. Unsupported, undocumented, flaky. I'd ritually burn it it I didn't have another AthlonXP stashed away somewhere.)

This is seen from a FreeBSD POV, though. Things might be different with the windows drivers involved.
Click to expand...

Same for me. The NForce 3 250 GB was just awful, since I went with a Via board there's silence in the carton.

I hated Via up to Athlon XP times, but they really got most of their act together.

As for NForce3 being decent:
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=664093#post664093
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=665054#post665054

NForce 4 doesn't seem to have that issue but boy do I see a lot of complaisn about broken drivers.

Not sure that the AMD/NVidia chipset mix on the NForce professional is doing. All the important parts are in the hands of AMD so it probably isn't too bad. But I'm not going to spend $500 to find out.
 
Yep. I just checked, and the MB has a KT400 [1] chipset. (Asus A7V8X-X, if anyone cares).
Moved the disks over, fired it up, and every single device on it was found and natively supported by stable drivers. I've had it for about two months now, and it appears to be perfectly solid and at least as fast.

My setup is kind of "wrong", btw. I play games on a single P4-Xeon in a dual-proc server MB, and my server is an athlon XP. I blame "historical reasons". ;)

[1] This makes it a bit newer than the nForce2, so "roughly the same design age" was wrong. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top