Best CPU for VM's & Video?

[JimPhreak]

What's the best CPU that will be going in a server hosting 5-10 VM's where the main VM will be transcoding multiple files simultaneously (Plex Media Server)?

 

[grimpr]

Fx 8320/8350.

 

[JimPhreak]

Fx 8320/8350.

How are they at handling intense video transcoding? Right now transcoding 1 file has my Q6600 at 100% a lot of the time. I need to be transcoding 2-3 files a time.

 

[grimpr]

Dont know but its definetely better than a Q6600, they are at Core i7 3770k level of performance with x264. If you transcode to x264 you can speed up the process by using the fastest x264 presets, doing that will allow more streams to encode in parallel.

 

[Ferzerp]

Fx 8320/8350.

No.

 

[grimpr]

No.

Got any better recommendation for the price of the FX instead of a dry no?

 

[Ferzerp]

Got any better recommendation for the price of the FX instead of a dry no?

He asked for the best choice not the best choice "for the price of the FX". You made up the rest to suit the choice you wanted to push.

The 3770k would be a better choice by far. Weak and wide (AMD) loses to strong and wide enough (Intel) for virtualization.

Though, the real answer is something in the E5 Xeon series. Encoding cares about width, but virtualization only cares about width in a "wide enough" type scenario. The key there is to go wide enough, and then get as much single threaded performance as you can.

 

[grimpr]

He asked for the best choice not the best choice "for the price of the FX". You made up the rest to suit the choice you wanted to push.

The 3770k would be a better choice by far. Weak and wide (AMD) loses not beat strong and wide enough (Intel) for virtualization.

Though, the real answer is something in the E5 Xeon series.

Best choise would be a 1000$ 6core Intel Core i7 which i presumed succesfully that he doesnt want to spend a dime on since he uses a Q6600 for the job and asks in the mainstream cpu forum and not in some server based one. Since VMs and Video encoding its a job well done by FX for the price i answered with the best product recommendation for the job, streaming media on home and running virtual machines. All other are assumptions from you.

 

[Ferzerp]

No, you did not. You fabricated an extremely low end budget that the poster in no way indicated in order to be able to suggest that chip.

to the OP: Right now my virtualization CPU of choice is the E5-2670. I have quite a few of these deployed running every workload imaginable pretty much.

 

[crazymonkeyzero]

Fx 8320/8350.

This is probably the best practical choice. It will run circles around that q6600 for under $200.

 

[JimPhreak]

Price range is $200-$300 (including Microcenter prices as I have one nearby). I actually have a 3770K in hand but it doesn't support VT-D and I'm thinking that could come in handy with what I'm trying to do. So I'm considering swapping it for a 3770 that does support VT-D. How would the 3770 fare vs. the FX series chips?

 

[Ferzerp]

What specifically are you looking to use direct IO for? If you aren't doing one of the specific things it allows, it gets you nothing. It has no general purpose VM use. If you aren't going to overclock, there is no real reason to use the K over the plain 3770.

 

[Chiropteran]

How are they at handling intense video transcoding? Right now transcoding 1 file has my Q6600 at 100% a lot of the time. I need to be transcoding 2-3 files a time.

Isn't transcoding a trivially paralleled task? If it takes x time to do 1 file at a time, doing 2 files at the same time will take 2x time and 3 files at the same time will take 3x time. If the transcoding software is written correctly, every CPU ever made will be at 100% usage while transcoding a single file.

 

[Ferzerp]

Isn't transcoding a trivially paralleled task? If it takes x time to do 1 file at a time, doing 2 files at the same time will take 2x time and 3 files at the same time will take 3x time. If the transcoding software is written correctly, every CPU ever made will be at 100% usage while transcoding a single file.

For the most part, yes.

 

[JimPhreak]

What specifically are you looking to use direct IO for? If you aren't doing one of the specific things it allows, it gets you nothing. It has no general purpose VM use. If you aren't going to overclock, there is no real reason to use the K over the plain 3770.

I'm not sure I do need to be honest I was just trying to cover all bases. Maybe keeping my 3770K and OCing it for better speed in transcoding is my best option.

Isn't transcoding a trivially paralleled task? If it takes x time to do 1 file at a time, doing 2 files at the same time will take 2x time and 3 files at the same time will take 3x time. If the transcoding software is written correctly, every CPU ever made will be at 100% usage while transcoding a single file.

So you're saying it doesn't matter what CPU I use for transcoding video? I would think certain CPUs would handle multiple files at the time better than others. I don't know if you're familiar with Plex Media Server but it transcodes video to clients in real time so you can watch the video as it transcodes. Each client is different as it depends on what file format that client supports natively. So a file played on one client may not need to be transcoded while it does have to be on another. So I need a CPU that will be able to keep up with 2-3 files at a time so there is no video loss/quality issues.

 

[grimpr]

No, you did not. You fabricated an extremely low end budget that the poster in no way indicated in order to be able to suggest that chip.

to the OP: Right now my virtualization CPU of choice is the E5-2670. I have quite a few of these deployed running every workload imaginable pretty much.

The thing is i presumed correctly on the price target and the home needs of the user and you did not. Move along now, you have nothing more to contribute.

 

[Chiropteran]

So you're saying it doesn't matter what CPU I use for transcoding video? I would think certain CPUs would handle multiple files at the time better than others.

No. It matters. But the measure should be how fast it can transcode a single file, not the number of files it can transcode at a time. As noted above the 8350 is very good at transcoding for it's cost.

 

[JimPhreak]

No. It matters. But the measure should be how fast it can transcode a single file, not the number of files it can transcode at a time. As noted above the 8350 is very good at transcoding for it's cost.

I understand now. In that case, wouldn't a 3770K @ 4.3-4.5Ghz do much better in that department than the 8350? I know it was $60 more but this is the main purpose for getting this CPU (virtualization is secondary) so I'm not as worried about price/performance ratio as I am just flat out performance.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

No. It matters. But the measure should be how fast it can transcode a single file, not the number of files it can transcode at a time. As noted above the 8350 is very good at transcoding for it's cost.

Not really when you factor in cost of operation.

i7 is the better chip, if you're getting MC prices there is really no contest tbh.

 

[Ferzerp]

I understand now. In that case, wouldn't a 3770K @ 4.3-4.5Ghz do much better in that department than the 8350? I know it was $60 more but this is the main purpose for getting this CPU (virtualization is secondary) so I'm not as worried about price/performance ratio as I am just flat out performance.

The 3770k will match the 8350 in the things that the 8350 is *most* suited to, and be much faster than it in everything else, all the while using about half the power. Video encoding falls in to the things that 8350 is most suited to, virtualization is not (despite what some laymen here may naively believe).

You decide.

 

[cytg111]

The 3770k will match the 8350 in the things that the 8350 is *most* suited to, and be much faster than it in everything else, all the while using about half the power. Video encoding falls in to the things that 8350 is most suited to, virtualization is not (despite what some laymen here may naively believe).

You decide.

+1

 

[moonbogg]

Have you taken a look at 3930k?

 

[Torn Mind]

VT-d lets the VM take control of a PCI-e device such as a video card and the native system cannot touch that device. So, you would need two video cards if you wanted to dedicate one for the VM since the native system also needs a means to output video.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...6900-what-intel-vt-d-how-will-benefit-me.html

Definitely look into the more expensive LGA 2011 CPU/Mobos if you plan to tax the thing heavily.

 

[JimPhreak]

Have you taken a look at 3930k?

I did but I can't act like price doesn't matter AT ALL. $230(3770k) vs. $500(3930k) is a big difference.

 

[JimPhreak]

VT-d lets the VM take control of a PCI-e device such as a video card and the native system cannot touch that device. So, you would need two video cards if you wanted to dedicate one for the VM since the native system also needs a means to output video.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...6900-what-intel-vt-d-how-will-benefit-me.html

Definitely look into the more expensive LGA 2011 CPU/Mobos if you plan to tax the thing heavily.

I've been reading up on it and video is not something I'll be doing at all on my VM's so that's not a concern. I was thinking more along the lines of controlling my physical NIC but from what I see, the benefits aren't going to help me that mcuh for what I'm doing PLUS doing so disables the ability to use vMotion which I WILL be using. So I think what I've got right now in hand (3770k + Asus P8Z77-V) will suffice for my needs.