Core i3-4330 or Xeon E3-1225 v3 for VMs?

jae

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2001
1,034
0
76
www.facebook.com
Which would be better for virtual machines (home lab)? Running either VMware ESXi or ProxMox.

Core i3 is dual core with hyperthreading (2C/4T). Xeon is quad core with no hyperthreading (4C/4T).
 

Burpo

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2013
4,223
473
126
Agreed.. BUT
it's hard to argue value of i3 when you can buy a new IBM ThinkServer T140 (no HDD) for $199 (less than the Xeon CPU)..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...683?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item46348111eb

The i3 is no slouch, especially single thread performance & power usage.
https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-4330+@+3.50GHz&id=2025

The Xeon clearly beats it, but 54% more power is required & of course is more expensive..
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E3-1225+v3+@+3.20GHz
 
Last edited:

jae

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2001
1,034
0
76
www.facebook.com
Agreed.. BUT
it's hard to argue value of i3 when you can buy a new IBM ThinkServer T140 (no HDD) for $199 (less than the Xeon CPU)..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thin...683?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item46348111eb

The i3 is no slouch, especially single thread performance & power usage.
https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-4330+@+3.50GHz&id=2025

The Xeon clearly beats it, but 54% more power is required & of course is more expensive..
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E3-1225+v3+@+3.20GHz


Exactly. I'm looking to buy the TS-140 with the Xeon but the i3 is always on sale for 199.99.
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,652
2,257
146
Well, vt-d isn't strictly necessary, and if the load was light , you'd not know the difference between the two. I wonder if you could buy the cheap one and throw a quad in later if you needed it.
 

Ratman6161

Senior member
Mar 21, 2008
616
75
91
Which would be better for virtual machines (home lab)? Running either VMware ESXi or ProxMox.

Core i3 is dual core with hyperthreading (2C/4T). Xeon is quad core with no hyperthreading (4C/4T).

Is none of the above an option? Are those your choices because you already have them or are you contemplating buying them. If you are looking to buy something have you considered the AMD FX8320?

As a desktop CPU I'm not a fan of the AMD FX lineup. But for your stated purpose of a home lab, they work really, really well. I happen to have two of them.

On one I've got six windows server VM's running on it - keeping in mind that this is a lab environment where I'ts just one or sometimes two people hitting these servers. You don't need a whole lot of CPU power to do it so its a case where more cores can be an improvement over fewer but better cores. I also crammed this system with 32 GB of cheap RAM...once again for a home lab quantity counts more than ultra fast. Where I spent the money on this system was on an LSI hardware RAID card. When running muliple VM's, if they are on a single disk drive, the competition for the dist is the biggest problem. Since its a 99fx MB there is enough PCI Express lanes available for the X8 RAID card and the X4 dual port intel gigabit NIC

Hhint - ESXI doesn't like onboard NICs found on desktop class motherboards - if you want guaranteed compatibility go with Intel NIC's. Also, onboard RAID is problematic too. You want an actual hardware RAID card thats on the compatibility list or else cram the system with multiple single disks so each VM can have its own.

So, lots of RAM, RAID rather than single disks (or go with quantity on disks) and CPU is not all that critical. The AMD FX is lots of cores for cheap which is a good combination for this purpose.

See:

http://www.microcenter.com/site/products/amd_bundles.aspx
 

Headfoot

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2008
4,444
641
126
Is none of the above an option? Are those your choices because you already have them or are you contemplating buying them. If you are looking to buy something have you considered the AMD FX8320?

As a desktop CPU I'm not a fan of the AMD FX lineup. But for your stated purpose of a home lab, they work really, really well. I happen to have two of them.

On one I've got six windows server VM's running on it - keeping in mind that this is a lab environment where I'ts just one or sometimes two people hitting these servers. You don't need a whole lot of CPU power to do it so its a case where more cores can be an improvement over fewer but better cores. I also crammed this system with 32 GB of cheap RAM...once again for a home lab quantity counts more than ultra fast. Where I spent the money on this system was on an LSI hardware RAID card. When running muliple VM's, if they are on a single disk drive, the competition for the dist is the biggest problem. Since its a 99fx MB there is enough PCI Express lanes available for the X8 RAID card and the X4 dual port intel gigabit NIC

Hhint - ESXI doesn't like onboard NICs found on desktop class motherboards - if you want guaranteed compatibility go with Intel NIC's. Also, onboard RAID is problematic too. You want an actual hardware RAID card thats on the compatibility list or else cram the system with multiple single disks so each VM can have its own.

So, lots of RAM, RAID rather than single disks (or go with quantity on disks) and CPU is not all that critical. The AMD FX is lots of cores for cheap which is a good combination for this purpose.

See:

http://www.microcenter.com/site/products/amd_bundles.aspx

Raiding spinning hard drives is a waste of money when you can get SSDs that are significantly faster than even RAID'd drives w/ similar capacity for the price of the drives + the controller. The era of RAID for performance on desktop is gone.
 

Ratman6161

Senior member
Mar 21, 2008
616
75
91
Raiding spinning hard drives is a waste of money when you can get SSDs that are significantly faster than even RAID'd drives w/ similar capacity for the price of the drives + the controller. The era of RAID for performance on desktop is gone.

Hmmm.

Point 1: Where are you buying SSD's that you can get 2 TB worth for the same price I can buy 4 500 GB spinning disks even including the RAID controller? For running a small number of VM's one could forgo the RAID controller and just put one VM per spinning disk and then we would be looking at less than half the price of the same amount of SSD storage which brings up...point 2.

Point 2: The OP is not talking about a "performance desktop". He was talking a lab environment where he specifically mentioned running VMWare ESXi. This is a completely different use case than a desktop. You say "SSDs that are significantly faster" which is true but not particularly relevant.

Point 3: "the era of RAID for performance on desktop is gone". I would argue there never was such an era, at least not for performance. Remember the "R" in RAID stands for redundant and while some RAID modes do increase performance over non-RAID disks, its the redundant part that's its reason for existing.
 

TeknoBug

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2013
2,084
31
91
i3 4330 doesn't have VT-d which is a big deal for VM's, an i5 4440 has it (my i5 3550 does too and I run VM's on it), but the Xeon is a good pick too.
 
Feb 25, 2011
16,983
1,616
126
i3 4330 doesn't have VT-d which is a big deal for VM's, an i5 4440 has it (my i5 3550 does too and I run VM's on it), but the Xeon is a good pick too.

i5/i7 don't support ECC RAM. (And there are Xeon's in the same ~$200 price range anyway.)