Upgrading server to one with faster cpu

[NYJimbo]

I do a lot of hosting around the country with different types of machines, different operating systems and different type of hosting needs. One thing that I am not clear on is how to determine the best upgrade path in processors because there are so many different types (cores, cache, speed) so when I upgrade a machine I sometimes get lost as to what is a next step up but not so expensive as to hurt my profits vs. monthly costs to rent servers.

For example, one of my clients is about to start another 25 sites and I think its time for one machine to be upgraded (move to new server). The current CPU is a Xeon X3460, which has been fine so far.

My options are going to a server with a 1270 (sandybridge) or a 5320 (clovertown) or a 5405 (harpertown). Passmark shows the 1270 to be siginificantly higher in performance but several hosting providers show the 5320 or 5405 as being a "better choice" and those servers are priced higher than the 1270 based servers.

These Xeons are/will be running W2k3 and w2k12 server. Regardless I am interested in the raw power first and then will take the o/s and apps into consideration
when I know which path in the Xeon family to go in.

Is there something other than passmark I can use to determine what the best processor is within my price range ? While these servers technically are for me, I am really reselling hosting so I have to provide a solid growth path for my customers.

Thanks for any help or ideas.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Why not virtualize on servers with multiple sockets. Sudden need for more CPU power, plop in another CPU.

Got a bunch of virtualized guests and one of them needs more power, virtually toss in another core or two....

Asking yourself the question of a CPU "upgrade" is needed, or not....first I'd want to see where the current server appears to be failing to deliver. "What is suffering?" Is it really up against the 85% CPU thresh hold? Or is it really hurting for more memory...stuck having to page more...and if so...paging on a sluggish disk subsystem.

Wondering about Clover vs Harper...hard to say, but bigger differences being such as 16 megs cache vs 24 megs cache....is this server running anything that can actually utilize and benefit from the cache increase, or would it be money thrown out the window?

 

[NYJimbo]

Why not virtualize on servers with multiple sockets. Sudden need for more CPU power, plop in another CPU.

Got a bunch of virtualized guests and one of them needs more power, virtually toss in another core or two....

Asking yourself the question of a CPU "upgrade" is needed, or not....first I'd want to see where the current server appears to be failing to deliver. "What is suffering?" Is it really up against the 85% CPU thresh hold? Or is it really hurting for more memory...stuck having to page more...and if so...paging on a sluggish disk subsystem.

Wondering about Clover vs Harper...hard to say, but bigger differences being such as 16 megs cache vs 24 megs cache....is this server running anything that can actually utilize and benefit from the cache increase, or would it be money thrown out the window?

Well its does have plently of ram and I have been watching it, as well as checking pools, cache, etc. It has 10k rpm velociraptors all around. Nothing can be virtualized. CPU usage is very light until it spikes and then we see heavy use and slow downs. The next machine will have more ram even if we don't need it right away but ram is not an issue now.

I just don't want to upgrade to a new machine with a greater ability to grow that machine in the future but then realize I got the wrong CPU and end up doing this again in 12 months. Some of my customer surprise me with a "I need 10 more ecommerce sites this month" and now I have to figure out where to put them and if I need to upgrade. I see that happening this summer and don't want to paint myself into a corner BUT I also don't want to buy a monster machine that will sit mostly idle for 2 years.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Nothing can be virtualized. Some of my customer surprise me with a "I need 10 more ecommerce sites this month" and now I have to figure out where to put them and if I need to upgrade. .

That right there..."Nothing can be virtualized"...makes life incredibly time consuming and expensive for you here. Esp if you're dealing with multiple clients, and some of those clients with multiple servers...and sporadically added servers.

But anyways to answer the original question, I'd look at the specific server operating system and services...the application(s) itself...and see what CPU they benefit from. Some benefit more from multi core, some benefit more from just pure speed, some benefit more from more cache (big mouthfuls of data with each chomp) regardless of speed of CPU, stuff like that.

 

[Markverhyden]

"Nothing can be virtualized". In reality everything is being virtualized. Especially servers.

Are your customers specifying a real server? Do you believe that it gives you some kind of competitive advantage?

There so many reasons why virtualization has been and will continue to be the direction everyone is heading. From simple redundancy to adding resources at the snap of a finger.

Out of curiosity how much are you spending on these dedicated boxes?

 

[bluecoast]

"Nothing can be virtualized". In reality everything is being virtualized. Especially servers.

Are your customers specifying a real server? Do you believe that it gives you some kind of competitive advantage?

There so many reasons why virtualization has been and will continue to be the direction everyone is heading. From simple redundancy to adding resources at the snap of a finger.

Out of curiosity how much are you spending on these dedicated boxes?

While almost any server can be virtualized, there are many apps out there that are unsupported on virtualized servers. In the case of LOB apps, some will outright refuse to support it if it is virtualized. This can be a sticking point since I always want an escalation path if it is something I cannot solve.


The problem with all benchmarks is they are synthetic. They simulate a load, it could be that in your situation a lower passmark scored CPU may actually outperform a high passmark scored CPU due to how the OS and apps utilize the cores/features.
I generally find RAM and disk to be the bottlenecks in standard web hosting, not sure what kind of websites you are hosting(sql heavy, CF, PHP, etc.)

 

[frederick]

We use ESXi, and virtualize everything. Our big daddy has 128GB of RAM, dual xeon, and a RAID 5 sitting at about 10TB, and 5 gigabit ports (one is strictly for the inside for server management). He runs right now 6 domain controllers and 12 web sites with room and power to spare. He has two sisters, Susie and Betty. Susie is a less powerful version but a direct clone of Big Daddy. Betty is our ESXi server that has our reverse proxy, dns, and other internal stuff on.

What's great is I can run these servers, and allocate resources to each one based on requirements without having to out and break my bank for a new one each time.

 

[gikstar]

Dell Poweredge C6100 w/8 6core processors?

We just purchased one of these Dell Poweredge C6100 4-node units which includes 8 Xeon X5650's and a total of 192Gbs of ram. We purchased it without hard drives and will be installing 256Gb Samsung 840 Pro's.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/380866446409?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

We will be installing it at one of our client offices and they will be letting us use one of the nodes.
We will purchase another in the future for ourselves and clear out a lot of the servers in our rack.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Nice Gikster....
We just pulled the trigger yesterday on a server upgrade for one of our ESX hosts...our mail scanner and our N-Central server could use a few more cylinders under the hood. Got a new Proliant DL360 on the way and will put them on that, leaving a buncha Windows servers on the current ESX host (a G-6 DL360).

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Just got our server in....dual 6x core Xeons, 64 gigs of RAM, 15krpm SAS. 4x NICs
Put on ESX 5.5, already moved our mail scanner and a few other servers to it, incredible how much better they're running.

 

[NYJimbo]

Thank you, but this doesn't really help. I dig how bragging on a MASSIVE server
upgrade is cool, but I don't see how it answers any questions.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

Reply was to Gikster who is doing a similar thing.
However, it is relevant to the thread topic, like it or not, since upgrades of virtual hosts are an easy way to add nut to existing server instances. Wonderfully easy to transfer guests to a new host.
BTW..a 1U server ain't "massive"...but I can post some pics of "massive" servers if you want.