PDA

View Full Version : What processor for a home VMware server?



Joseph Marton
02-Dec-2012, 05:48
Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally going
to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should look at
the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now thinking about
the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

HvdHeuvel
02-Dec-2012, 11:13
On Sun, 02 Dec 2012 04:48:11 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

Joe,

> Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally going
> to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should look at
> the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now thinking about
> the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

I found the following quite an interesting read :

http://www.vexperienced.co.uk/2012/10/22/home-lab-a-scalable-vsphere-
whitebox/#more-3068

Cheers
Hans

Paullamontagne
02-Dec-2012, 15:23
Joe,

I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra 146GB
drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of ram and 2
146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and drives but this is
great as a start


>>>
> Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally going
> to build an i7‑based system but now I'm wondering if I should look at
> the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now thinking about
> the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

Paul

Joseph Marton
02-Dec-2012, 17:26
Hans van den Heuvel wrote:

> http://www.vexperienced.co.uk/2012/10/22/home-lab-a-scalable-vsphere-
> whitebox/#more-3068

That's a decent box, quite a bit more than I was hoping to spend. It
made me think, perhaps I should look into the Xeon E5 line? I only
want to do a single CPU though so the 2603 which he used isn't much
horsepower at 4 cores, no HT, and only 1.8GHz. Looking at the rest of
the family the price goes up quickly, and pretty much there are no
affordable E5 processor at 2GHz or greater (with or without HT).

So for me looks like it's going to be a decision between the i7 and the
E3. Unless I go with some sort of "Extreme Edition" of the i7 that's
ridiculously priced, both are capable of a max 32GB (I'd prefer 64GB
but I'm just gonna forgo that).

BTW, if I go E3, the E3-1245V2 (3.4GHz, quad-core, HT, 8M cache) runs
about $260. This is an Ivy Bridge CPU.

If I go i7, the i7-3770K (3.5GHz, quad-core, HT, 8M cache) runs about
$230. This is also an Ivy Bridge CPU.

This particular E3 seems to add vPro, Intel VT-d, Trusted Execution,
Demand Based Switching, Fast Memory Acces, and Flex Memory Access.

I doubt I will need vPro or Trusted Execution. Are the power saving
features or the memory access features something I'll really benefit
from in a virtualization host? Is it worth losing some clock speed and
an extra $30?

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Joseph Marton
02-Dec-2012, 17:27
Paul Lamontagne wrote:

> I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
> drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra
> 146GB drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of
> ram and 2 146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and
> drives but this is great as a start

Wow that's cheaper, cheaper than what I'd build, where did you find it?

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

KBOYLE
02-Dec-2012, 19:33
Joseph Marton wrote:

> Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally
> going to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should
> look at the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now
> thinking about the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

There *is* a difference between a box designed as a server,
workstation, and a desktop, regardless how it may ultimate be used.

The Xeon is Intel's processor for servers and workstations. These days
there is very little difference in cost between a Xeon and an
equivalent desktop processor so I would go with the Xeon.

Of course you'll need an appropriate motherboard. Here too there are
important differences between server boards and desktop boards. Server
boards, even entry level ones that support a single processor,
generally can accommodate a larger RAM capacity, use ECC RAM, can
accommodate a larger IO and PCI bandwidth, provide on-board SCSI/SAS,
and are designed to run 24 x 7. Workstation boards are similar but
usually include or can accommodate high performance graphics which
aren't needed on a server.

If you're building your own, I would look at some of the Intel entry
level motherboards. If such a system does not fall within your budget,
I would look for a used server, perhaps on eBay. They are usually very
cost effective.

One other point, VMware products generally experience fewer issues if
run on approved hardware so if you have the option I would go that
route.

HTH

--
Kevin Boyle - Knowledge Partner
If you find this post helpful and are using the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below...

Joseph Marton
02-Dec-2012, 20:19
KBOYLE wrote:

> The Xeon is Intel's processor for servers and workstations. These days
> there is very little difference in cost between a Xeon and an
> equivalent desktop processor so I would go with the Xeon.

Take a look at the detailed comparison I gave of two CPUs I'm looking
at, one an i7, the other a Xeon E3. Only $30 separates the two, but
the two CPUs also look very similar spec-wise. It's tough trying to
see what the Xeon does better that I'll actually take advantage of in
exchange for losing some clock speed vs the i7.

> Of course you'll need an appropriate motherboard. Here too there are
> important differences between server boards and desktop boards. Server
> boards, even entry level ones that support a single processor,
> generally can accommodate a larger RAM capacity, use ECC RAM, can
> accommodate a larger IO and PCI bandwidth, provide on-board SCSI/SAS,
> and are designed to run 24 x 7. Workstation boards are similar but
> usually include or can accommodate high performance graphics which
> aren't needed on a server.

Generally speaking I'd say you are correct. However in this case the
max RAM supported is just 32GB either way. IO & Bandwidth look very
similar as well at least with the CPU specs. I haven't checked ECC
capabilities so that could be one slight advantage. And as to 24x7,
well, my current "server" is an old HP/Compaq dc5000 with a P4 CPU.
It's been running 24x7 for many years though I've replaced the CPU when
I discovered the L2 cache had failed. My i7-based desktop is nearly 4
years old now and also runs 24x7. I've lost one processor in it as
well, but I'm pretty sure that was a result of a power supply fan
failure I experienced earlier this year.

> One other point, VMware products generally experience fewer issues if
> run on approved hardware so if you have the option I would go that
> route.

That's my biggest concern. If I go a true workstation/entry-level
server board and Xeon CPU, even if it's the E3, I'm guessing I'll run a
lesser risk of issues with ESXi than with a desktop board and the i7.
Of course if I go with an actual used server there's even less risk as
I can at that point check VMware hardware compatibility list. Still,
for the combined cost savings I get with both CPU & motherboard, I'm
still tempted to try the i7 route.

BTW, here are the specs on the two CPus. You can see they are honestly
very similar to each other.

Intel Xeon E3-1245V2
http://ark.intel.com/products/65729

Intel Core i7-3770K
http://ark.intel.com/products/65523

If I could afford a decent Xeon E5 then there'd be no question I'd just
go that route. But since a decent E5 is over $400 alone (thinking the
2620) that's not gonna happen. Almost seems like, then, it's a flip of
the coin going with an i7 or an E3.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

malcolmlewis
02-Dec-2012, 20:51
On Sun 02 Dec 2012 07:19:54 PM CST, Joseph Marton wrote:

KBOYLE wrote:

> The Xeon is Intel's processor for servers and workstations. These days
> there is very little difference in cost between a Xeon and an
> equivalent desktop processor so I would go with the Xeon.

Take a look at the detailed comparison I gave of two CPUs I'm looking
at, one an i7, the other a Xeon E3. Only $30 separates the two, but
the two CPUs also look very similar spec-wise. It's tough trying to
see what the Xeon does better that I'll actually take advantage of in
exchange for losing some clock speed vs the i7.

> Of course you'll need an appropriate motherboard. Here too there are
> important differences between server boards and desktop boards. Server
> boards, even entry level ones that support a single processor,
> generally can accommodate a larger RAM capacity, use ECC RAM, can
> accommodate a larger IO and PCI bandwidth, provide on-board SCSI/SAS,
> and are designed to run 24 x 7. Workstation boards are similar but
> usually include or can accommodate high performance graphics which
> aren't needed on a server.

Generally speaking I'd say you are correct. However in this case the
max RAM supported is just 32GB either way. IO & Bandwidth look very
similar as well at least with the CPU specs. I haven't checked ECC
capabilities so that could be one slight advantage. And as to 24x7,
well, my current "server" is an old HP/Compaq dc5000 with a P4 CPU.
It's been running 24x7 for many years though I've replaced the CPU when
I discovered the L2 cache had failed. My i7-based desktop is nearly 4
years old now and also runs 24x7. I've lost one processor in it as
well, but I'm pretty sure that was a result of a power supply fan
failure I experienced earlier this year.

> One other point, VMware products generally experience fewer issues if
> run on approved hardware so if you have the option I would go that
> route.

That's my biggest concern. If I go a true workstation/entry-level
server board and Xeon CPU, even if it's the E3, I'm guessing I'll run a
lesser risk of issues with ESXi than with a desktop board and the i7.
Of course if I go with an actual used server there's even less risk as
I can at that point check VMware hardware compatibility list. Still,
for the combined cost savings I get with both CPU & motherboard, I'm
still tempted to try the i7 route.

BTW, here are the specs on the two CPus. You can see they are honestly
very similar to each other.

Intel Xeon E3-1245V2
http://ark.intel.com/products/65729

Intel Core i7-3770K
http://ark.intel.com/products/65523

If I could afford a decent Xeon E5 then there'd be no question I'd just
go that route. But since a decent E5 is over $400 alone (thinking the
2620) that's not gonna happen. Almost seems like, then, it's a flip of
the coin going with an i7 or an E3.



Hi
The Xeon supports a few more features, eg ECC memory, VT-d, Intel
trusted execution, extra pci express configurations. So depending on
the Motherboard options a Xeon would support more features I would
guess extra SAS cards, pci express SSD or SSD cache.

My money would be on the Xeon....

--
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE 12.2 (x86_64) Kernel 3.4.11-2.16-desktop
up 5 days 4:22, 3 users, load average: 0.12, 0.08, 0.06
CPU Intel i5 CPU M520@2.40GHz | Intel Arrandale GPU

KBOYLE
02-Dec-2012, 21:56
Joseph Marton wrote:

> KBOYLE wrote:
>
> > The Xeon is Intel's processor for servers and workstations. These
> > days there is very little difference in cost between a Xeon and an
> > equivalent desktop processor so I would go with the Xeon.
>
> Take a look at the detailed comparison I gave of two CPUs I'm looking
> at, one an i7, the other a Xeon E3. Only $30 separates the two, but
> the two CPUs also look very similar spec-wise. It's tough trying to
> see what the Xeon does better that I'll actually take advantage of in
> exchange for losing some clock speed vs the i7.

It's a common fallacy that a faster processor will produce a better
system. For example, take a 2 GHz and a 1.8 GHz processor. The
difference in speed is about ten percent. Often the cost of the faster
processor greatly exceeds ten percent of the cost of the slower
processor. Considering that most of the time a systems runs nowhere
near a hundred percent processor utilisation, all the faster processor
will do is provide a little extra headroom. It certainly doesn't mean
that your system will run ten percent faster.



> > Of course you'll need an appropriate motherboard. Here too there are
> > important differences between server boards and desktop boards.
> > Server boards, even entry level ones that support a single
> > processor, generally can accommodate a larger RAM capacity, use ECC
> > RAM, can accommodate a larger IO and PCI bandwidth, provide
> > on-board SCSI/SAS, and are designed to run 24 x 7. Workstation
> > boards are similar but usually include or can accommodate high
> > performance graphics which aren't needed on a server.
>
> Generally speaking I'd say you are correct. However in this case the
> max RAM supported is just 32GB either way. IO & Bandwidth look very
> similar as well at least with the CPU specs. I haven't checked ECC
> capabilities so that could be one slight advantage.

Again, you're focusing on the processor. You should be looking at an
optimal system design where there are few bottlenecks. Servers are
usually constrained by IO bandwidth and RAM limitations. Your processor
won't be properly utilised if you can't get the data into RAM and from
RAM to the processor quickly enough. Real *server* motherboards are
designed to minimise these bottlenecks. Server motherboards are
typically designed to use Xeon processors.

Servers, in general, place pretty heavy demands on disk IO and network
IO. Running a server OS on a laptop or desktop may be okay tor a demo
but, in a real world scenario, it would be very easy to swamp the PCI
bus thereby creating a bottleneck. Server motherboards have additional
PCI busses to provide additional capacity and to reduce risk of the PCI
bus becoming a bottleneck.

In virtual environments, RAM is a precious resource. Even if your
virtual servers are lightly loaded, the amount of RAM the host can
accommodate will often determine the number of VM's you can run. 32 GB
may seem like a lot, and perhaps it is initially. If you expect to
continue using this platform for many years, I would suggest you may
want a motherboard that supports a larger capacity.


> And as to 24x7,
> well, my current "server" is an old HP/Compaq dc5000 with a P4 CPU.
> It's been running 24x7 for many years though I've replaced the CPU
> when I discovered the L2 cache had failed. My i7-based desktop is
> nearly 4 years old now and also runs 24x7. I've lost one processor
> in it as well, but I'm pretty sure that was a result of a power
> supply fan failure I experienced earlier this year.

When designing a server, reliability and data integrity are usually key
objectives. Yes, you can use a desktop computer and it may not fail or
a failure *may* not affect a critical component but the risk is
greater. Server motherboards often have additional safeguards that may
not be widely publicised, like error checking on the PCI bus, to ensure
corrupted data is not written to the hard drive. Most of the time these
things are not issues on desktop systems.



> > One other point, VMware products generally experience fewer issues
> > if run on approved hardware so if you have the option I would go
> > that route.
>
> That's my biggest concern. If I go a true workstation/entry-level
> server board and Xeon CPU, even if it's the E3, I'm guessing I'll run
> a lesser risk of issues with ESXi than with a desktop board and the
> i7. Of course if I go with an actual used server there's even less
> risk as I can at that point check VMware hardware compatibility list.
> Still, for the combined cost savings I get with both CPU &
> motherboard, I'm still tempted to try the i7 route.

I would suggest you verify what OS's are supported on any motherboard
you are considering. Manufacturers will usually specify if a particular
motherboard supports SLES, VMware, etc. They often specify the specific
releases that are supported. Again, use this information to reduce the
risk and minimise issues.


>
> BTW, here are the specs on the two CPus. You can see they are
> honestly very similar to each other.
>
> Intel Xeon E3-1245V2
> http://ark.intel.com/products/65729
>
> Intel Core i7-3770K
> http://ark.intel.com/products/65523
>
> If I could afford a decent Xeon E5 then there'd be no question I'd
> just go that route. But since a decent E5 is over $400 alone
> (thinking the 2620) that's not gonna happen. Almost seems like,
> then, it's a flip of the coin going with an i7 or an E3.

IMO, comparing processor specs is of no consequence and while cost is
always an issue, determining the appropriate system configuration based
on the cost of the processor is *not* the way to do it.

If you can design and build your own server, if it falls within your
budget, and if you understand the tradeoffs, I say "go for it"!
Otherwise, you may be better off looking at a previously used
(refurbished) Tier 1 server. Many of these units no longer provide the
capacity needed by a large enterprise but may be more than adequate for
what you need.

--
Kevin Boyle - Knowledge Partner
If you find this post helpful and are using the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below...

Simon Flood
03-Dec-2012, 13:55
On 02/12/2012 04:48, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally going
> to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should look at
> the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now thinking about
> the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

What do you want to do with it?

Yes I know you want to virtualise servers but what I mean is how heavily
is it going to be used? If you just want a server you can throw VMs at
but you're not overly bothered about performance than a cheap option is
to buy a HP N40L Microserver which has an AMD Turion II CPU.

In the UK you can get one for ~250 and then claim 100 cashback! You
could then max it out with 16GB RAM (specs say 8GB max but it'll take 16GB).

HTH.
--
Simon
Novell/SUSE/NetIQ Knowledge Partner

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you work with Novell technologies at a university, college or school?
If so, your campus could benefit from joining the Novell Technology
Transfer Partner (TTP) program. See novell.com/ttp for more details.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

George
03-Dec-2012, 15:01
On 12/2/2012 9:23 AM, Paul Lamontagne wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
> drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra 146GB
> drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of ram and 2
> 146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and drives but this is
> great as a start
>
>

One thing that surprised me is how much less power the newer generation
machines use. I have some 2950s at a location (dual CPU, 8 Gb, RAID 5 w/
4-146 Gb drives, dual power supply) and I added an R720 (dual CPU, RAID
10 (4-15k RPM drives), 48 Gb, dual power supplies and the R710 draws
about 60% of what the 2950s do.

MichaelC
03-Dec-2012, 18:59
> On 02/12/2012 10:13, Hans van den Heuvel wrote

Well, there's a blast from the past :)
How you doing old fella? :)

Michael
--
"I've got the key to the gates of paradise, but I've got too many legs!"

Paullamontagne
04-Dec-2012, 02:40
ebay .....

>>>
> Paul Lamontagne wrote:
>
>> I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
>> drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra
>> 146GB drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of
>> ram and 2 146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and
>> drives but this is great as a start
>
> Wow that's cheaper, cheaper than what I'd build, where did you find it?

Paul

Paullamontagne
04-Dec-2012, 02:41
>>>
> On 12/2/2012 9:23 AM, Paul Lamontagne wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
>> I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
>> drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra
> 146GB
>> drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of ram and 2
>> 146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and drives but this is
>> great as a start
>>
>>
>
> One thing that surprised me is how much less power the newer generation
> machines use. I have some 2950s at a location (dual CPU, 8 Gb, RAID 5 w/
>
> 4‑146 Gb drives, dual power supply) and I added an R720 (dual CPU, RAID

> 10 (4‑15k RPM drives), 48 Gb, dual power supplies and the R710 draws
> about 60% of what the 2950s do.

Interesting, but for my 1 2950 I think i can live with the power
consumption

Paul

HvdHeuvel
04-Dec-2012, 14:13
On Mon, 03 Dec 2012 17:59:11 +0000, MichaelC wrote:

>> On 02/12/2012 10:13, Hans van den Heuvel wrote
> Well, there's a blast from the past :) How you doing old fella? :)
>
> Michael

Dude, talking about blasts ...
Wow, that has been a long time indeed.

Still entertaining myself here doing similar type of stuff still, so I'm
doing okay I think. At least for the most part though, lol.

What about you and what you up to these days ?

Cheers
Hans

W_ Prindl
05-Dec-2012, 00:02
I think that depends mostly on the guests, you want to run.
If you have only typical server guests, which generally do not need
much processor power in a home environment I would not invest much into
processor speed, but more into the number of cores. The number of cores
is of course a question of the number of guests you want to run
simultaneously. If you want to use your servers as terminal servers
then horse power and processor speed is an issue. So all in all if it
is a virtual environment I would prefer processors and motherboards,
which allow addition of a second processor at a later time over single
processor solutions, so if using a Xeon I'd take an E5 with maybe less
speed or an old E5000.
--
W. Prindl


Joseph Marton wrote:

>Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally
>going to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should
>look at the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now
>thinking about the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

MichaelC
07-Dec-2012, 09:21
Hans
> Dude, talking about blasts ...
> Wow, that has been a long time indeed.

Just a bit - it's 7 since I was in RDG...!

> Still entertaining myself here doing similar type of stuff still, so I'm
> doing okay I think. At least for the most part though, lol.

Good, good - sounds like you're there for the long haul then

> What about you and what you up to these days ?

Left my old job at the end of October - now doing some consulting.
Current project is some process improvement work, absolutely loving work
for the first time in years Got married a couple of years back & we had
a little boy last year, so that side of my life's changed quite
considerably since the old days too :D

Michael
--
"I've got the key to the gates of paradise, but I've got too many legs!"

Joseph Marton
07-Dec-2012, 22:40
Joseph Marton wrote:

> Looking at building an ESXi 5.1 server at home. I was originally
> going to build an i7-based system but now I'm wondering if I should
> look at the Xeon E3 instead. What makes more sense? Right now
> thinking about the E3 1245v2 CPU with the Asus P8B board.

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. I was starting to lean toward the
Xeon E3 setup but found it hard to pony up the extra money for a server
board, especially with the particular recommendation I got from Mr.
Wilson for an MSI board at only $65.

In the end I went with the MSI Z77A-G41 mATX board and Intel Core i7
3770 (non-K). I didn't realize that the non-K version actually
includes additional virtualization features making it almost identical
to the E3 1245v2, and also the exact same price. The only problem I
had was that for some reason ESXi wouldn't detect the Realtek onboard
8111E NIC even though stuff I read said it was supported. I tried both
5.0 and 5.1 with no luck. Instead of fighting it further I just went
out and bought an Intel gig NIC for $30. When adding that to the
motherboard price I still saved easily over $100 vs purchasing a server
class motherboard.

We'll see how this desktop setup winds up working. For now, though,
I'm happy as I have ESXi 5.1 running along with a few VMs: OES2 (inc.
GW 2012), Data Sync, and a certain file sharing solution we're working
on.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Jim Henderson
07-Dec-2012, 23:20
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:40:51 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

> In the end I went with the MSI Z77A-G41 mATX board and Intel Core i7
> 3770 (non-K). I didn't realize that the non-K version actually includes
> additional virtualization features making it almost identical to the E3
> 1245v2, and also the exact same price.

That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle miniature
case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in the air. If
it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit the socket.

The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included takes
up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for about $1K.

Jim

--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

ab
07-Dec-2012, 23:37
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Had a friend price out a box for me for the same purpose (KVM server):


EVGA GeForce GTX 650 01G-P4-2650-KR Video Card
Item #:N82E16814130827
Return Policy: VGA Standard Return Policy $109.99

NVIDIA Gift PC Game Assassin's Creed 3
Item #:N82E16800999298
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $0.00

Western Digital Red 2TB 3.5 SATA 6.0Gb/s Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
Item #:N82E16822236343
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $149.99
$129.99

OCZ Fatal1ty 750W Modular Gaming Power Supply compatible with Intel
Sandy Bridge Core i3 i5 i7 and AMD Phenom
Item #:N82E16817341041
Return Policy: Iron Egg Guarantee Return Policy $119.99
$99.99

G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600
(PC3 12800) Desktop Memory
Item #:N82E16820231507
Return Policy: Iron Egg Guarantee Return Policy $144.99

AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz (4.2GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ Eight-Core Desktop Processor
Item #:N82E16819113284
Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy $219.99

COOLER MASTER HAF 932 Advanced RC-932-KKN5-GP Steel Computer Case
Item #:N82E16811119160
Return Policy: Iron Egg Guarantee Return Policy $159.99
$139.99

GIGABYTE GA-970A-D3 ATX AMD Motherboard
Item #:N82E16813128521
Return Policy: Iron Egg Guarantee Return Policy $99.99

OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-240G 2.5 MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
Item #:N82E16820227727
Return Policy: Limited Replacement Only Return Policy $199.99
$179.99


If I find money I may get a smaller case and a bigger SSD, but we'll see.

So for a little system, $1,124.92

Good luck.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQwm/DAAoJEF+XTK08PnB52bcP/2xnSyEVWsZNDSWJEve+f/CW
PBcLfhP7V6gh7hBPgk2lR4+WfP9VmfG2g4g3yLtU5dAEcPAETQ RimMQ9DZelaOAH
tvx8wONzaUDBjmmQf2uSlNt0N/cRKgwrq7+CO02c9XsOYTLt8pRm6uVUYTo0Qfqo
MsneewrURYL3lRsCIA4TqBOU1WZsIhjIg6cX6sVNXa+KUdR/5nDnTpG0qEOhjarF
XjYa5zRTsRk0sHdnbvkGJPYLHHmlhpvtqZ6tq9zj1lhiMlfLNZ xvsXRAaMQdiKFd
WSq4aZPvGqEK3ghcJkrMJP3tYAzDYcB0UcIjY3YdAmA+sdiEk9 Di/I45lEzoovfq
1yoERsb2VWlQUHzKEwc8XberwdRV9A32w0kCSlk5mm9RoTc8ur QAGtnBQk2vzwMI
LA2S6TroMzRZobsiXri8uU1yKNVEgts/3gfU2YVKIjPH49yvhMi2pQzuaHMVzDgx
RfLI0GZmtjRUHXm/9NplW1qGy8M2BCDtQpr9TC5QL1tqwvxnrRy8LirmiipXG1jQ
nHtlKKGYxrKWcuyjsOark5W2c3z7CwrPjn7XHajap/REcUuKu6l8F+tZg74lmtsE
m9+9HmtclldW5cVqxrd2uZpB5Swk3NnRMtd8dRpOTp1Qui1E7J qLSwAarPFWOkFY
qu5kOq/Pi/FIvrYMjy6A
=VSH8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jim Henderson
07-Dec-2012, 23:41
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 22:37:55 +0000, ab wrote:

> So for a little system, $1,124.92
>
> Good luck.

Not bad - here's the system case/mobo I'm looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856101117

Nice small case, lower power consumption - though it looks like the free
SSD offer is over now (it was only 60 GB, but still, as a boot drive that
would've been nice).

Jim

--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Joseph Marton
08-Dec-2012, 01:17
Jim Henderson wrote:

> That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
> myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle
> miniature case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in
> the air. If it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit
> the socket.
>
> The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included
> takes up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for
> about $1K.

My entire system cost about $475 with 16GB of RAM (add another $70 to
take it to 32GB). Granted I didn't have to buy a hard drive because I
had one laying around but even if I had to buy one the entire price
would have still been under $600.

MSI Z77A-G41 motherboard: $65
Intel Core i7-3770 CPU: $260
16GB Corsair Vengeance RAM (1600MHz, CL10): $70
Refurbished DVD-ROM drive: $10
Diablotek EVO case: $35
Coolermaster 500W power supply: $35

There's no video card in there either as I'm just using the built-in
Intel video that's part of the CPU. For ESXi it's more than enough.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Joseph Marton
08-Dec-2012, 01:19
ab wrote:

> Had a friend price out a box for me for the same purpose (KVM server):
>
>
> EVGA GeForce GTX 650 01G-P4-2650-KR Video Card
> Item #:N82E16814130827
> Return Policy: VGA Standard Return Policy $109.99

If it's just a KVM server, do you even need a video card? Don't the
AMD CPUs have integrated ATI video in them now?

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Paullamontagne
08-Dec-2012, 02:11
I just picked up 16GB in 4x4GB chunks..so that Later I'll add another 16 to
get 32gb....now all i need are a few other hard drives..and i'll be
good..with a "real" server

>>>
> Paul Lamontagne wrote:
>
>> I just picked up a Dell 2950 Dual quad core Server....using SAS
>> drives....very quick...It can hold 32 GB of ram and you can get extra
>> 146GB drives relatively cheap....I paid 250 for a box with 12 GB of
>> ram and 2 146GB drives....drives....I'll be adding more ram and
>> drives but this is great as a start
>
> Wow that's cheaper, cheaper than what I'd build, where did you find it?


--
Paul

ab
08-Dec-2012, 05:54
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I checked the mobo specs; guess not on the video card. Oh well; not a
big deal. Maybe I'll try to find a less-great one since I honestly
never push them even to 3D stuff.

Good luck.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQwsgbAAoJEF+XTK08PnB5A5AQAJql3DEUq6 5IN7oxakdmt26Z
EBEv42R+wXv9oh2BbVqanudyWyF/dGiURGk+ydWG8pJGUabjnoLfEXixoWfQyW+9
/Tvt0A5AQ6SsgxV0hBEl4o34yEGq27INX+n8iiDFThbtb4+/aMfZOCgVmdKQsbFe
AHKavrujPuV85kA65T0BdMm91AEZCyl6NMJh/HCyJqozrs+Q3p2PW1R5diR2t43+
pZzcQnZNSb7Y3prjOZeqMJajicauLO42dtbPsRxsVklxl8Hi+/OKc6RZjZAfv/aN
AKyCkWUIrCuSFSdwmK+YchRIUJQOciH8lI8Lhk+MJM2W1DFsy6 cSSd6TNSWmW95l
ZJ1J03oQmelUfHHvO09+2gMhNTLao99AgdkTJCmK6/IIm1P2hrX33em2VYtPCbXE
5nZk++/yrc0X/tff9xsB9J7jLIPJ5Z+vB/j1x5DEhJJTE0hD7sjWNk96upa16CX/
bFMjKVFHup/4qO1R/IfdyZdH4xot5jHbgcx1JiauHtoFYjGgTMyMZPZ+mi2MlFlF
B5PTnh6M69vTiWS8tYGQ6G15DbWnqDqzqSKNImcAbl2tPFg4rp Zx88yb8QOtM/MH
U4Pemx6RGwdNgKi5OBivirfyLBozVvWed5Vvxw6wjoonds8gbH ouhk0liqcAl0Rd
rlkW06ggRskzuJ//hSWM
=vl6Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jim Henderson
08-Dec-2012, 07:19
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 00:17:17 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
>> myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle
>> miniature case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in
>> the air. If it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit
>> the socket.
>>
>> The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included
>> takes up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for
>> about $1K.
>
> My entire system cost about $475 with 16GB of RAM (add another $70 to
> take it to 32GB). Granted I didn't have to buy a hard drive because I
> had one laying around but even if I had to buy one the entire price
> would have still been under $600.
>
> MSI Z77A-G41 motherboard: $65 Intel Core i7-3770 CPU: $260 16GB Corsair
> Vengeance RAM (1600MHz, CL10): $70 Refurbished DVD-ROM drive: $10
> Diablotek EVO case: $35 Coolermaster 500W power supply: $35
>
> There's no video card in there either as I'm just using the built-in
> Intel video that's part of the CPU. For ESXi it's more than enough.

Nice, I may have to rethink my project and see if the form factor you're
using would work for me.

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Haitch
08-Dec-2012, 16:12
On 12/7/2012 4:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:40:51 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:
>
>> In the end I went with the MSI Z77A-G41 mATX board and Intel Core i7
>> 3770 (non-K). I didn't realize that the non-K version actually includes
>> additional virtualization features making it almost identical to the E3
>> 1245v2, and also the exact same price.
>
> That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
> myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle miniature
> case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in the air. If
> it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit the socket.
>
> The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included takes
> up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for about $1K.
>

My on and off ESX server is based on this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131670

It's ATX sized so fits in a standard mid tower case, and it runs fast
and quiet. CPU's for it are available on ebay for $140. 12 Core server
with upto 128GB of RAM for not a lot of money.

H.

Joseph Marton
08-Dec-2012, 16:22
Jim Henderson wrote:

> Nice, I may have to rethink my project and see if the form factor
> you're using would work for me.

I actually have a larger case than I need, having bought an ATX case a
few months ago. Had I realized I was going to buy an mATX motherboard
I would have just bought an mATX case.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Jim Henderson
08-Dec-2012, 20:51
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 15:22:43 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> Nice, I may have to rethink my project and see if the form factor
>> you're using would work for me.
>
> I actually have a larger case than I need, having bought an ATX case a
> few months ago. Had I realized I was going to buy an mATX motherboard I
> would have just bought an mATX case.

Ah, I see.

Part of my goal is to minimize space as well, but I don't know if that's
worth an extra $400 or so.

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Jim Henderson
08-Dec-2012, 20:53
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 15:12:13 +0000, Haitch wrote:

> On 12/7/2012 4:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:40:51 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:
>>
>>> In the end I went with the MSI Z77A-G41 mATX board and Intel Core i7
>>> 3770 (non-K). I didn't realize that the non-K version actually
>>> includes additional virtualization features making it almost identical
>>> to the E3 1245v2, and also the exact same price.
>>
>> That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
>> myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle
>> miniature case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in
>> the air. If it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit
>> the socket.
>>
>> The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included
>> takes up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for
>> about $1K.
>>
>>
> My on and off ESX server is based on this:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131670
>
> It's ATX sized so fits in a standard mid tower case, and it runs fast
> and quiet. CPU's for it are available on ebay for $140. 12 Core server
> with upto 128GB of RAM for not a lot of money.

Nice.

Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly not
clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Haitch
08-Dec-2012, 23:20
On 12/8/2012 1:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:

> Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
> experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
> each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly not
> clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.

I like the AMD because
- Two hex core AMD's cost less than a single Intel Hex core Xeon
- 12 real cores vs 6 real + 6 HT.
- It can use standard desktop memory, or registered ECC memory.
- Under full load it draws < 250W from the wall. Very low running cost.
New Xeons are better on the power draw, but at the time I got it a dual
Xeon was drawing > 500, and required horribly expensive fb-dimms.

H.

Jim Henderson
09-Dec-2012, 07:23
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 22:20:55 +0000, Haitch wrote:

> On 12/8/2012 1:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
>> experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
>> each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly
>> not clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.
>
> I like the AMD because - Two hex core AMD's cost less than a single
> Intel Hex core Xeon - 12 real cores vs 6 real + 6 HT.
> - It can use standard desktop memory, or registered ECC memory.
> - Under full load it draws < 250W from the wall. Very low running cost.
> New Xeons are better on the power draw, but at the time I got it a dual
> Xeon was drawing > 500, and required horribly expensive fb-dimms.

That's good to know. :)

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Massimo Rosen
09-Dec-2012, 13:36
Jim,

On 08.12.2012 20:53, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
> experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
> each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly not
> clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.

CPU performance is usually your least concern on a VMWare host. It's all
about I/O performance first, especially I/O per second (less so
sequential I/O).

I'm running 5 Servers at home (one Netware, 4 OES running a two node
lcuster and ZCM in there) on an oldish 3GHz quad-core AMD. Whenever I
notice a performance decrease, it's *always* I/O (running 4 SATA drives
in the 1TB range). The combined cpus hardly ever reach 50% load, unless
one of the guests has a real problem (i.e hangs).

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de

George
09-Dec-2012, 17:59
On 12/8/2012 2:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 15:12:13 +0000, Haitch wrote:
>
>> On 12/7/2012 4:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:40:51 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the end I went with the MSI Z77A-G41 mATX board and Intel Core i7
>>>> 3770 (non-K). I didn't realize that the non-K version actually
>>>> includes additional virtualization features making it almost identical
>>>> to the E3 1245v2, and also the exact same price.
>>>
>>> That's good to know - I'm planning to build a virtualization server
>>> myself (for KVM, though) and am probably going to get a Shuttle
>>> miniature case/mobo from Newegg for it - but the processor was up in
>>> the air. If it'll take the non-K, that's what I'll get if it'll fit
>>> the socket.
>>>
>>> The shuttle case is nice because it's small, but the mobo included
>>> takes up to 32 GB of RAM - I figure I can build the system out for
>>> about $1K.
>>>
>>>
>> My on and off ESX server is based on this:
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131670
>>
>> It's ATX sized so fits in a standard mid tower case, and it runs fast
>> and quiet. CPU's for it are available on ebay for $140. 12 Core server
>> with upto 128GB of RAM for not a lot of money.
>
> Nice.
>
> Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
> experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
> each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly not
> clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
The other concern is portability. Sometimes you can't successfully move
a VM from a host with a Intel CPU to say one with AMD and vice versa.

Also I used a lot of AMD CPUs in the past but they are imploding. It
sure would be nice to have robust competition to Intel as in the past
but AMD got stuck in the mud with some serious design flaws on I forget
which architecture and never got back up to speed.

ab
09-Dec-2012, 18:34
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> CPU performance is usually your least concern on a VMWare host. It's
> all about I/O performance first, especially I/O per second (less so
> sequential I/O).
>
> I'm running 5 Servers at home (one Netware, 4 OES running a two node
> lcuster and ZCM in there) on an oldish 3GHz quad-core AMD. Whenever
> I notice a performance decrease, it's *always* I/O (running 4 SATA
> drives in the 1TB range). The combined cpus hardly ever reach 50%
> load, unless one of the guests has a real problem (i.e hangs).

Exactly. My laptop is currently my best VM host and not because it has
the most memory or fastest processor, but because everything flies from
my SSD using SATA 3.

For that reason I"d like to do fun things with my disk storage... all of
my current disks (or parts of disk which are being changed) on my SSDs
in a server and then the rest on the big ugly slow spinning drives which
will hopefully just be cached anyway as much as necessary.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQxMu6AAoJEF+XTK08PnB5fKUP/09D6rD452dpG1h0AmulvQPl
J6TRRNt6jhm4dMtVOtDknkeSn+v/X2nnhF/h6AGgiE2Ho/sp4Mau5QU41a7Z4kvm
U5J95ZiUvGVRYQZXrCYgLzfo0oNuuMv98pkGXEcWJNB4ctgZqx kvhgDFiobKYqZf
460yMgyUxGqedbM7XJFnubeBheM5DQ2NXWxD2UaWU9ZoNfpN1H uoOMTT3++s9eqW
Rh+YXnNMKXkt+zgzXoUZ3ASqIIgVL0USi88uZNNcmzvaFrh00i rPTRfqm3vZuMZ3
OFL3iCOk5XgDMcmfiX4lX7pOD7R+cXpNZMh9H/f6nZy5QMWC4oVY4DinWDM4s8ZY
ETiLQYfwOGViM8MeOWd8LJsIclLXPpynMf954MVP1108kN/0z4R4mRaSEZNJcTV+
nD26bbDl4lzU9wSFEe3vQyMn0I2UqrFKmX2jzAW88IMiJfwcZF I8/w/WG/KyPaZ0
7gHgXCJP4/iQBeZFV8QaZ6loPiEoUGbrBN4a4K/6E1f4VzZeeYYuAcCt1KmQcNlw
oZqW9OS9l7eUHo3pOANEnRJ3TSJ/rMxLDXTkM7+nTj9FaU3m6SkIxadsknSCCpdU
kj3c4MItPl37BWbR0xJAauaSrHtwRl9iAb2IXmUTIC+kvECsJT QqNr1zZSADhWdL
veCECbO4/LEP8dJZdY+D
=vkda
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Haitch
09-Dec-2012, 18:47
On 12/9/2012 10:59 AM, George wrote:

> The other concern is portability. Sometimes you can't successfully move
> a VM from a host with a Intel CPU to say one with AMD and vice versa.
>

You can't vmotion a running VM from Intel to AMD, or the other way, but
I've never had a problem cold migrating from one to the other.

H.

ab
09-Dec-2012, 18:53
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Well come on, don't tease us; what are the rest of the components?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQxNAeAAoJEF+XTK08PnB5j+EQAIKK20cLgr LIoggMvTLw1egO
svRGwWMLsQQJtWArVxbJqtt2Yni0P7GapGO/UpVt8HYCspsHjc2SLzogCVSI1Ev1
fCtPWgZw66VFst8h0DxbmJtGoAEzHjFIpEjCuXBFPOKXQQ+ISn eEx/0Im9h6CMMZ
Jy1W2jNcOvygElnFAIQl9T5atvTuZ0zNtZniETBh1r+kOSgXho Z0R+doo6DKlaHO
YIAXhxpp1q0m6VCSi88+EZPYDBaUTHSERLt6ZdFXk01hynqSPO pG9PeRl4UixNUo
4LTK7gmmofmKif6rPej4wQ1wnEwp7nqXrhyfNyeHVFXR+Rk0LP AulAUQwCfk+xDA
lCnNtNP372wsuy4E96/IgT4C27LXaOA8pCqXVgQLQp6EvUdyFtr7pLKyVaQmwbjR
UTh+8bvGI7EhNiyPrgDn/dLr/79W1SSmhApb7YjWCAf0yFYyQvK6IqIEmijVL0Kj
Yw/GwT4biv80yoBp1dLZCVPRNp8IsQEj7ECgAWiW0FCe+Vn3KExym iDXphFPisyz
RxtJ9JcOkkWqNC2GyTvTVPuCYUgHvL9CvWAQFREz+T78ncUmpm akAbHDdbQ6JF2S
2foEb5N7+lt4wCcKKMaPhmIKagvqhKs5f+xxxCtN0Zc7ymW6MA g/xht5sKo7WzDA
ipmffVZ6CvX50+BWy8ql
=a4t8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Haitch
09-Dec-2012, 19:45
On 12/9/2012 11:53 AM, ab wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Well come on, don't tease us; what are the rest of the components?

- 16GB (8 * 2GB) RAM
- 2 * AMD Opteron 4180 Hex cores
- USB Thumbdrive for booting to ESXi
- Antec 550W Power supply
- On board NICs for VM network
- Dual port Intel gigabit NIC for iSCSI

Other ESX host
- HP DL380 G5
- Dual quad core Xeons
- On board NICs for VM network
- Dual port Intel gigabit NIC for iSCSI
- 4GB RAM :-( (Want to get more, but yet to find "cheap" FB-DIMMs)
- 76GB SAS Boot drive

iSCSI "SAN" (current version)

- Gigabyte X58A-UD7
- Intel i980 Hexcore
- 18GB RAM (3 * 4GB + 3 * 2GB @ 1600MHz)
- "Hot Lava" 6 port Gb ethernet for iSCSI
- Onboard NIC for management
- Seasonic 750W P/S (Needs to be replaced - gets very noisy under heavy
load)

- Runs NAS4Free to present ZFS volumes via iSCSI
- ZFS-Single datapool (Raid 5 equivalent)
- 6 * 500GB drives for Data
- 25GB SSD partition for ZIL
- 75GB (3 * 25GB) Raid 0 Partition for read cache.
- The SSD drives are on a 100GB PCIe OCZ card - 4 * 25GB

I'm building a variation of the above for use at work (portable SAN for
backing up client ESX servers prior to upgrades, POC test storage,
internal testing storage etc):

- Quad core i7-3820
- 64GB Ram
- 8 * 3TB drives
- 256GB PCIe SSD for ZIL & read cache.

Around 20TB usable for around $3,000.

Joseph Marton
10-Dec-2012, 02:43
ab wrote:

> Exactly. My laptop is currently my best VM host and not because it
> has the most memory or fastest processor, but because everything
> flies from my SSD using SATA 3.
>
> For that reason I"d like to do fun things with my disk storage... all
> of my current disks (or parts of disk which are being changed) on my
> SSDs in a server and then the rest on the big ugly slow spinning
> drives which will hopefully just be cached anyway as much as

If you want to same some cash and deal with a bit less performance you
could always go with a Western Digital 7200rpm drive with 64MB cache.
Or there's even their Velociraptor line which is 10krpm. I can
personally vouch for the Velociraptors as being noticeably faster than
your typical 5400 rpm drive.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

KBOYLE
10-Dec-2012, 03:43
Joseph Marton wrote:

> I can
> personally vouch for the Velociraptors as being noticeably faster than
> your typical 5400 rpm drive.

Who uses 5400 rpm drives and expects performance?

Seagate has some nice 4 TB 7200 rpm drives...

--
Kevin Boyle - Knowledge Partner
If you find this post helpful and are using the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below...

ab
10-Dec-2012, 04:45
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

No no, I meant the filesystem cache, not the disk cache. 64 MB... bleh,
who cares? If I build a server it's going to have 32+ GB RAM and that
cache will make the hard drive cache seem to be nothing... because
really, that's what it is. 64 MB is a lightweight phone application
(okay, I'm being a little facetious there), and while I'm sure that can
help I don't use programs, especially on servers, that are going to
benefit much from that when the OS is already caching gigabytes for me
regardless of the availability of the hard drive's cache. For example
on my laptop:

Mem: 16337156 16183628 153528 0 223452 8786316

Yea! 8 GB of cache helping me out. If my hard drive was wasting time
caching that what benefit would it be? If my box was too busy to cache
and I had to use a hard drive cache, would it really help? I don't
know... I'm a skeptic.

Good luck.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQxVr0AAoJEF+XTK08PnB5NSsQANaEjsD3Es f2RYsc6Fu/Q74Y
2aEeh8aaA7VuLjSWvflbLdwTYhahStd1ggLc931gkZd7YtM0hT J4LSiOKfgCmKiD
RNUqL2Xd1tRORzBglbtXtQP4pOUBHbIWFUjgAMRAoIO/7JN3KSm4Qkhi7Mqt4Qb8
0EaxKt2VH7PIW5JrMDzA9CdpOHiDgKPL75w5OyeKvRSM+GuRBr Vn8AvlFbrIYwKX
SZ83EaxLS6XXj71a9piFm9NtidL2OUIwlUINPl+TYehUMV4av4 f00Q7JIUQ7lmRW
AL8joslR8UrRocOcSp4KS7U+hEbN4/4rgZcbn0IDmXuVkUDN88HH+eyA74O1HMKi
xwNFSy38/+Jj9Uh02og5KnT0hM2ZQbUrOmdJwyfza6CuMDbF+xqPScBR7IQ BTpe6
mh0iJCtjpoxM3wFxJ8wIfL8MnqLbE3Vnsb3VuSifeU3eIGK+np FAcOKY7Q/kgCiM
LCJ7GNZGS+qexyRo8UwNNU4Jn3ky+kiVV7BXT9BE5ghtxfLfIS xamPvPEA39r6Kv
wCQG/pmeWvori9e2mElVO5Daf7Oyp/ZjmS9XgM6iyJJYOjpT0ifkyx2mHfPOWQaL
Kz3ojlVlO8Ifb4gY053FKj1bvsoVx/Psiw6mPBbYigYaUGuO1uj9rkhjDE1x8s8G
SmmG4DTeyc1EwjlhCgXf
=XCGk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jim Henderson
10-Dec-2012, 06:45
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:59:25 +0000, George wrote:

> The other concern is portability. Sometimes you can't successfully move
> a VM from a host with a Intel CPU to say one with AMD and vice versa.

I've only found that to be an issue if the VM is suspended when moved (or
doing a live migration). Though I see to recall Windows might actually
care about the CPU. :)

> Also I used a lot of AMD CPUs in the past but they are imploding. It
> sure would be nice to have robust competition to Intel as in the past
> but AMD got stuck in the mud with some serious design flaws on I forget
> which architecture and never got back up to speed.

My oldest machine currently is a dual-core AMD 64 system. I added a quad-
core i7 (8 cores with hyperthreading) laptop and a quad-core AMD
system. I've been happier with the laptop, overall, but both get the
job done pretty well.

Jim
--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Jim Henderson
10-Dec-2012, 06:49
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 12:36:15 +0000, Massimo Rosen wrote:

> On 08.12.2012 20:53, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Though I notice it uses AMD - I have been thinking Intel because my
>> experience with Intel has been pretty good (I've currently got two of
>> each) - but in terms of performance for virtualization, I'm honestly
>> not clear on which CPU has the biggest performance advantage.
>
> CPU performance is usually your least concern on a VMWare host. It's all
> about I/O performance first, especially I/O per second (less so
> sequential I/O).

True, that is where the bottlenecks come up first if you don't do
something to manage it. One of the products I worked with in my contract
work is a product that can throttle/manage block device I/O (Linux hosts
here) so things can balance out - and I'm probably going to run that on
the host and see how it affects virtualization performance.

But I know, for example, that Access Manager performance can be severely
hampered by using virtualized MAGs (or is it LAGs, I don't remember now)
and for that product, it's recommended that under a heavy load it not be
virtualized for that very reason.

Thanks for reminding me of that, because I had forgotten that
discussion. :)

> I'm running 5 Servers at home (one Netware, 4 OES running a two node
> lcuster and ZCM in there) on an oldish 3GHz quad-core AMD. Whenever I
> notice a performance decrease, it's *always* I/O (running 4 SATA drives
> in the 1TB range). The combined cpus hardly ever reach 50% load, unless
> one of the guests has a real problem (i.e hangs).

I guess it also depends on whether you're running CPU-intensive programs,
too. I may pick up my raytracing software again, and that'll tend to
drive more CPU than I/O. :)

Jim
--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

George
10-Dec-2012, 14:53
On 12/9/2012 12:47 PM, Haitch wrote:
> On 12/9/2012 10:59 AM, George wrote:
>
>> The other concern is portability. Sometimes you can't successfully move
>> a VM from a host with a Intel CPU to say one with AMD and vice versa.
>>
>
> You can't vmotion a running VM from Intel to AMD, or the other way, but
> I've never had a problem cold migrating from one to the other.
>
> H.

And I recently found a MS reference regarding Server 2012 Hyper-V. They
say you can't move (any method) a VM from an Intel CPU host to a AMD CPU
host and vice versa.

Hamish
10-Dec-2012, 15:18
On 12/10/2012 7:53 AM, George wrote:

> And I recently found a MS reference regarding Server 2012 Hyper-V. They
> say you can't move (any method) a VM from an Intel CPU host to a AMD CPU
> host and vice versa.

Do you have a link to that? Live migration will not work, but I've
(cold) migrated plenty of VM's from AMD to Intel and back again under
VMware and never had an issue. I'd be surprised if it failed under Hyper-V.

H.

George
10-Dec-2012, 15:37
On 12/10/2012 9:18 AM, Hamish wrote:
> On 12/10/2012 7:53 AM, George wrote:
>
>> And I recently found a MS reference regarding Server 2012 Hyper-V. They
>> say you can't move (any method) a VM from an Intel CPU host to a AMD CPU
>> host and vice versa.
>
> Do you have a link to that? Live migration will not work, but I've
> (cold) migrated plenty of VM's from AMD to Intel and back again under
> VMware and never had an issue. I'd be surprised if it failed under Hyper-V.
>
> H.
>
I don't remember exactly but it was an explicit warning about not being
able to do it. I will not try to remember where so likely it will come
back to me later.

Joseph Marton
10-Dec-2012, 16:34
Hamish wrote:

> I'd be surprised if it failed under
> Hyper-V.

I'd be surprised if virtualization worked at all under Hyper-V. :-)

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Rudolf Thilo
12-Dec-2012, 14:46
Hi.

>I've only found that to be an issue if the VM is suspended when moved
>(or doing a live migration). Though I see to recall Windows might
>actually care about the CPU. :)

You can even do a "live" vmotion of running machines, *IF* you use the
"CPU ID Masking", (VM guest, properties, tab options, CPU ID Mask,
advanced) down to a level, that both CPUs, AMD and Intel will support.
That might end up in cutting down the CPU capabilities to almost
"nothing" ;-))


Regards, Rudi.

Bob Crandell
13-Dec-2012, 17:37
On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:51:27 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

>
> Ah, I see.
>
> Part of my goal is to minimize space as well, but I don't know if that's
> worth an extra $400 or so.
>
> Jim

You want small?
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/
next-unit-computing-introduction.html

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 17:46
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:37:53 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:

> On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:51:27 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>
>> Ah, I see.
>>
>> Part of my goal is to minimize space as well, but I don't know if
>> that's worth an extra $400 or so.
>>
>> Jim
>
> You want small?
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-
motherboards/
> next-unit-computing-introduction.html

Nice, but only i3 processors and 16 GB of RAM. :)

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Joseph Marton
13-Dec-2012, 18:36
Bob Crandell wrote:

> You want small?

Since when did that become a good thing?

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Bob Crandell
13-Dec-2012, 19:01
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:46:03 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:37:53 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:51:27 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Ah, I see.
>>>
>>> Part of my goal is to minimize space as well, but I don't know if
>>> that's worth an extra $400 or so.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>
>> You want small?
>> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-
> motherboards/
>> next-unit-computing-introduction.html
>
> Nice, but only i3 processors and 16 GB of RAM. :)
>
> Jim

There is an i5 model also.

My workstation only has 16 GB of RAM. It works well with 3 sometimes 4
VMs (VMware Workstation v9) running (One was ZoneMinder with 3 cameras).
I was also spreading sheets, processing words, Groupwise, Firefox, remote
sessions and Folding at Home. Well, I had to give up Folding. ZoneMinder
moved to it's own box after we added 6 more cameras.

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 19:05
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:01:29 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:

> There is an i5 model also.
>
> My workstation only has 16 GB of RAM. It works well with 3 sometimes 4
> VMs (VMware Workstation v9) running (One was ZoneMinder with 3 cameras).
> I was also spreading sheets, processing words, Groupwise, Firefox,
> remote sessions and Folding at Home. Well, I had to give up Folding.
> ZoneMinder moved to it's own box after we added 6 more cameras.

I'm wanting to do an i7 and at least 32 GB of memory - not just trying to
build something for today's usage, but something that has some "future-
proofing" in it for lab work I may be doing down the road. I tend to buy
things (in general) with a long view, trying to get more than 5 years out
of it if I can. :)

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 19:06
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:36:56 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Bob Crandell wrote:
>
>> You want small?
>
> Since when did that become a good thing?

Since physical space is at a premium (we're looking to move within the
next year, and I want small for the move and to not take a lot of space
in the new place we want to move to, since it's a much smaller space).

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Bob Crandell
13-Dec-2012, 19:44
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:06:39 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:36:56 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:
>
>> Bob Crandell wrote:
>>
>>> You want small?
>>
>> Since when did that become a good thing?
>
> Since physical space is at a premium (we're looking to move within the
> next year, and I want small for the move and to not take a lot of space
> in the new place we want to move to, since it's a much smaller space).
>
> Jim

So finally convinced SWMBO to move to Oregon?

KBOYLE
13-Dec-2012, 19:44
Jim Henderson wrote:

> I'm wanting to do an i7 and at least 32 GB of memory

As pointed out previously, processor utilisation is generally not an
issue in a virtual environment while memory limitations are.

I have not seen any pricing for these new Intel PC's but I imagine they
are relatively inexpensive. If that is the case, it may be possible to
provide inexpensive shared iSCSI storage and deploy several of these
devices adding additional units as needed for increased capacity.

Sometimes, when new technology becomes available, we need to rethink
our traditional solutions.

--
Kevin Boyle - Knowledge Partner
If you find this post helpful and are using the web interface,
show your appreciation and click on the star below...

Joseph Marton
13-Dec-2012, 19:47
Jim Henderson wrote:

> >> You want small?
> >
> > Since when did that become a good thing?
>
> Since physical space is at a premium (we're looking to move within
> the next year, and I want small for the move and to not take a lot of
> space in the new place we want to move to, since it's a much smaller
> space).

Sorry, I was thinking of something else where the opposite is better.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

Bob Crandell
13-Dec-2012, 22:58
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:47:32 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

>
> Sorry, I was thinking of something else where the opposite is better.

--
Does this washcloth smell like chloroform?

I'm getting woozy.

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 23:16
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:44:54 +0000, KBOYLE wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> I'm wanting to do an i7 and at least 32 GB of memory
>
> As pointed out previously, processor utilisation is generally not an
> issue in a virtual environment while memory limitations are.

As I mentioned previously, it depends on whether the processes are I/O
bound or CPU bound, and I will likely have some of both. :)

> I have not seen any pricing for these new Intel PC's but I imagine they
> are relatively inexpensive. If that is the case, it may be possible to
> provide inexpensive shared iSCSI storage and deploy several of these
> devices adding additional units as needed for increased capacity.
>
> Sometimes, when new technology becomes available, we need to rethink our
> traditional solutions.

Sure, and if it were a business use case, I'd probably be looking for
something like that. But it's a home lab, probably will be fronted with
a SUSE Studio Onsite instance so I can do custom openSUSE/SLE builds for
stuff I'm working on.

Jim
--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 23:16
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:47:32 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> >> You want small?
>> >
>> > Since when did that become a good thing?
>>
>> Since physical space is at a premium (we're looking to move within the
>> next year, and I want small for the move and to not take a lot of space
>> in the new place we want to move to, since it's a much smaller space).
>
> Sorry, I was thinking of something else where the opposite is better.

I figured that was probably the case after the fact. ;)

Jim



--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Jim Henderson
13-Dec-2012, 23:18
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:44:36 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:06:39 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:36:56 +0000, Joseph Marton wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Crandell wrote:
>>>
>>>> You want small?
>>>
>>> Since when did that become a good thing?
>>
>> Since physical space is at a premium (we're looking to move within the
>> next year, and I want small for the move and to not take a lot of space
>> in the new place we want to move to, since it's a much smaller space).
>>
>> Jim
>
> So finally convinced SWMBO to move to Oregon?

I don't have a SWMBO ( :) ), but Amy and I decided some time ago that
that's where we want to move to, just been having difficulty finding a
job that's a good fit there. We're tentatively targeting May for when
we'd like to move, though. :)

So it didn't take a lot of convincing - she's got friends there who are
eager for us to move, and since Ken's graduated and moved out, all we
have to worry about is moving three senior cats (one 9 years old, two 16
years old).

Jim

--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Bob Crandell
13-Dec-2012, 23:53
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:18:37 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

>>> Jim
>>
>> So finally convinced SWMBO to move to Oregon?
>
> I don't have a SWMBO ( :) ), but Amy and I decided some time ago that
> that's where we want to move to, just been having difficulty finding a
> job that's a good fit there. We're tentatively targeting May for when
> we'd like to move, though. :)
>
> So it didn't take a lot of convincing - she's got friends there who are
> eager for us to move, and since Ken's graduated and moved out, all we
> have to worry about is moving three senior cats (one 9 years old, two 16
> years old).
>
> Jim

No SWMBO. Sure. I believe you. Swing by when you are in the
neighborhood and I'll feed you. There is a great Mexican food place
across the parking lot.

We are down to 2 cats now. One 11 the other 15.
http://www.cfainc.org/client/breedOcicat.aspx

Jim Henderson
14-Dec-2012, 00:10
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:53:06 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:

> No SWMBO. Sure. I believe you.

You should. :) Our relationship isn't like that, honestly. :)

> Swing by when you are in the
> neighborhood and I'll feed you. There is a great Mexican food place
> across the parking lot.

Will do! Which place is it?

> We are down to 2 cats now. One 11 the other 15.
> http://www.cfainc.org/client/breedOcicat.aspx

Which two are yours? (Or am I seeing two pictures of one and one of the
other?)

We technically have 4, but one of them is feral, so she won't be coming
with us. She's 10 years old, though. :)

Jim


--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Bob Crandell
14-Dec-2012, 00:44
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:10:24 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:53:06 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:
>
>> No SWMBO. Sure. I believe you.
>
> You should. :) Our relationship isn't like that, honestly. :)
>
>> Swing by when you are in the
>> neighborhood and I'll feed you. There is a great Mexican food place
>> across the parking lot.
>
> Will do! Which place is it?
>
>> We are down to 2 cats now. One 11 the other 15.
>> http://www.cfainc.org/client/breedOcicat.aspx
>
> Which two are yours? (Or am I seeing two pictures of one and one of the
> other?)
>
> We technically have 4, but one of them is feral, so she won't be coming
> with us. She's 10 years old, though. :)
>
> Jim

That cat isn't ours. It just looks like him. Mousse died of leukemia
earlier this year. Chatty is 11 and is black and silver. Teddybear is
blue. We used to show them through CFA. It was fun. In our heyday we
had maybe 15 cats and kittens rampaging through the house. Aw, the pitter
patter of little feet.

Jim Henderson
14-Dec-2012, 03:11
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:44:56 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:

> That cat isn't ours. It just looks like him.

Oh, I see. :)

> Mousse died of leukemia
> earlier this year.

I'm sorry to hear that. :(

> Chatty is 11 and is black and silver. Teddybear is
> blue. We used to show them through CFA. It was fun. In our heyday we
> had maybe 15 cats and kittens rampaging through the house. Aw, the
> pitter patter of little feet.

These three will be our last - it turned out that I'm pretty severely
allergic to them (3p on the scratch test). But we had a feral colony as
well (did trap and release with them all, missed one of the first
generation females, so we had two generations, and our youngest is part
of the second generation of that colony; the older feral we still look
after is the last of the first). At its peak, our colony was about 16
cats, plus our (at the time) two indoor cats.

The two older are half Persian and half Siamese, so they have long hair
and blue eyes. They're not too bright - one of them seems to be
developing some form of dementia; the other has a thyroid condition and
needs to be drugged daily now.

And the youngest is almost a $4,000 cat now just due to medical issues
(not counting the "normal" expenses). He's had health problems all his
life, and has to be given lysine irregularly (two of the other kittens in
the litter he was in died before we found them).

Wouldn't trade them for the world. Might threaten to turn them into
slippers on occasion, though.... :)

Jim
--
Jim Henderson, CNA6, CDE, CNI, LPIC-1, CLA10, CLP10
Novell Knowledge Partner

Bob Crandell
14-Dec-2012, 16:38
On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:11:21 +0000, Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:44:56 +0000, Bob Crandell wrote:
>
>> That cat isn't ours. It just looks like him.
>
> Wouldn't trade them for the world. Might threaten to turn them into
> slippers on occasion, though.... :)
>
> Jim

I hear you. All our cats were/are indoor cats. We had to baby proof the
place. Especially when the kitten storm troopers were terrorizing the
house. On the plus side they did train me to put my shoes away. So many
times I would go to put my shoes on in the morning only to discover the
shoe laces soaked from one cat or another trying to chow down on them.