cPanel on Pentium D Dual Core? Or go with Xeon?

[sneader]

Hi all. I'm in the process of adding a new server and am looking for some advice. The server I am considering has the following specifications:

• 2U Chassis w 6 Hot-Swap SATA Bays and 350W Hot-swap redundant Power Supply
  \--- (460W Hot-Swap redundant power supply available for an extra charge)
• 1 x LSI MegaRAID SATA 150-6 6-port 64MB cache raid controller With LSI Battery Back-up Pack
• 1 x Intel SE7230NH1LX motherboard
• 1 x Intel Pentium D Dual Core 820 2.8GHz 800MHz 2x1MB Cache
• 3 drive 250GB SATA RAID with hot spare
  \--- (4 x 250GB SATA HDD Seagate Near-Line Storage Series w/5 yr warranty)
• 1 extra 250GB SATA for cPanel backups (will also use off-server FTP for backups)
  \--- (1 x 250GB SATA HDD Seagate Near-Line Storage Series w/5 yr warranty)
• 2GB = 2 x 1GB DDR2 ECC PC2-5400 Motherboard-Validated Memory
• On board dual Intel Gigabit Networks. 2 x RJ45 connectors for CAT6 TP
• No OS installed (we will install Fedora Core 4 or CentOS)
• DVD-ROM

I've been asking around and am getting some varying advice with regards to the use of a Pentium D Dual Core for the processor. Seems like many (most?) are using Dual Xeon's these days.

TIA,

- Scott

 

[chirpy]

Xeon = server
Pentium = desktop

It's a matter of chipsets, motherbaords, RAM, etc too. If you want a (more) reliable server, go with server components. If you want the cheapest "bang for your buck" then you cvan go with the desktop compnents.

 

[sneader]

Intel says Pentium D is a Server Processor

Hi Jonathan. As always, I appreciate your help!

The reason I even considered the Pentium D is that it was developed and promoted as a server platform. One article of many on the Internet that discusses this is at:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20050711214023.html

ARTICLE QUOTE:

As reported before, Intel on Monday released its first server platform built around dual-core Intel Pentium processors. The new product is primarily aimed at cost-effective and blade servers, but can offer performance close to higher-end 2-way Intel Xeon-based machines.​

Switching to Dual Xeon is going to add significant cost, but I will probably go that route, due to your concern.

- Scott

 

[[email protected]]

The Dual core will do fine, but Xeon will do better

I have deployed numerous servers of varying flavors and from my experience in most cases the processor is not the server bottleneck. Although Dual Xeon is a great way to go, I am not sure that it will be worth the extra cash unless you are sure that the D core will come up short. Having used many D core chips in the last 6 months I have to say that their performance/price is excellent. Just my 2 c.

The comment above that Xeon = Server and Pentium = Desktop really is not appropriate, it can happen that way, but it is by no means an either/or scenario. I have seen many a Dual Xeon desktop build, and many a D core server build... they all have their place depending on projected bottleneck...

* another key consideration for using a Dual Core is the reduction in power consumption for equivalent processing power, although this may not be a concern for you, along with lower cost it is one of the key selling points to D core.

KW

 

[chirpy]

Oh, I do agree that it's not an either/or situation, which is why I qualified the remark. You'll probably find Intel pushing the D core at the server platform simply because it doesn't yet have a Xeon dual-core chip out to compete with the AMD Opteron dual-core chips. The dual core Xeons are on their way.