Dual Quad 3.33Ghz or Dual Hexa 2.00Ghz?

serverian

Same cpubenchmark.net results on both CPUs.

Which one would you prefer? And why?

Disclaimer: L5638 vs W5590

Maounique

Hexa. More cores is better for VMs, they need massive threading. The more cores/threads, the better is load handled, fine tuning also works better. M

marcm

@serverian I second @Maounique's recommendation. The Xeon L5638 is also a year newer than the Xeon W5590. GHz isn't everything, and on a multi-user system where you want to deploy virtualization the number of physical cores is more important than their speed, especially on large servers.

serverian

What about for database and web?

marcm

@serverian Can you post the complete server config for the hexa core and what you intend to do with it? Also, are these dual socket or single socket servers?

serverian

@marcm, there is no server, just taking opinions about the processor config. Dual socket.

marcm

@serverian said: there is no server, just taking opinions about the processor config. Dual socket.

Then I'll stick to my original recommendation: get the hexa core L5638 - you can do better with it regardless of the task, especially when it comes to virtualization.

netomx

Dual hexacore? I'm getting arouse

eva2000

L5638 vs W5590 http://ark.intel.com/compare/41643,48766

Clock for clock, westmere is only 25-50% faster than nehalem so L5638 ain't much faster given it's low default clock speeds. For performance to price ratio, better alternative would be dual Xeon X5650 to X5670 http://ark.intel.com/compare/47922,52581,47920,47921,41643,48766

Or Xeon E5649 http://ark.intel.com/compare/52581,47920,47921,41643,48766

marcm

@eva2000 we have dual hexa core E5 servers and they perform really well, so if the OP could get a dual Xeon E5 2620 2.0GHz /w 15MB cache per CPU they he should go for it. Your recommendations are also very solid :-)

concerto49

@marcm said: @eva2000 we have dual hexa core E5 servers and they perform really well, so if the OP could get a dual Xeon E5 2620 2.0GHz /w 15MB cache per CPU they he should go for it.

Sandy Bridge to Westmere is a lot different than Westmere to Nehalem. Westmere to nehalem was just a die shrink.

eva2000

Indeed if Intel E5 Sandy Bridge-EP cpus are an option even better as they have ntel Integrated IO and Data Direct IO tech which folks seem to overlook :)

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/io/direct-data-i-o.html http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/io/xeon-e5-workstation-integrated-io-video.html

At home i'm running dual Xeon E5-2650 octa-cores = 16 cpu cores/32 cpu threads :)

marcm

@eva2000 said: At home i'm running dual Xeon E5-2650 octa-cores = 16 cpu cores/32 cpu threads :)

Nice! Now I'm jealous :-)

concerto49

@marcm said: Nice! Now I'm jealous :-)

Me too. I don't have that @ home. I wouldn't know what to use it for though.

eva2000

@concerto49 said: Me too. I don't have that @ home. I wouldn't know what to use it for though.

for me one use is for web/db server scalability testing i.e. revisiting my old tests again http://vbtechsupport.com/606/

just on the edge though as mysql 5.6 now scales to 48 cpu core/threads > 16/32 cpu core/threads heh

Oliver

Moarrrr cores!