Exchange Server 2003

[BDawg]

I'm in the process of building a new Exchange server.

Now that we have many processor options with dual core and quad core, I wonder, am I best off spending more money to make dual processors faster or by increasing the number of processors.

Any ideas?

 

[myocardia]

That depends totally on what those processors will be doing. Will they be handling alot of large data, or alot of smaller requests? Large data makes better use of faster cores, more requests makes better use of more cores.

 

[BDawg]

Exchange would be lots of smaller data.

What I'm looking at currently is a quad core Xeon @ 2.0GHz. However, a dual core @ 3.0GHz is only $100 more.

A 50% increase in clock speed seems like a lot to me. Then again, so is a 200% increase in processors.

 

[myocardia]

Well, my best guess would be that those two processors would perform similarly, because of the 50% clockspeed advantage of one, and the 200% core advantage of the other. I would still think that the quad 2.0 would perform slightly better, though. Anyone else have experience with Exchange servers, that could answer his question without having to guess?

 

[Noubourne]

Originally posted by: myocardiaAnyone else have experience with Exchange servers, that could answer his question without having to guess?

No, but if I knew my IT employee was coming to Anandtech forum to ask random_idiot_001 (not that there aren't a few sharp ones in here) about advice to use for (likely) multi-thousand dollar hardware purchases for my company, I'd fire the guy on the spot.

Hell, if one of my IT employees asked random_idiot_001 for advice about a $5 hardware purchase he'd be posting his resume on Monster tout de suite!

 

[Noubourne]

To be actually helpful (shocking from me I know), here are some links you probably SHOULD use for information about this purchase:

Microsoft on Exchange Server req's

This looks fairly unbiased (most benchies you find are from a server manufacturer - HP, Dell, Sun, etc).

How about MS Exchange team blog? (for 2007).

Exchange Server Benches from Microsoft

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: BDawg
I'm in the process of building a new Exchange server.

Now that we have many processor options with dual core and quad core, I wonder, am I best off spending more money to make dual processors faster or by increasing the number of processors.

Any ideas?

Depends on the number of clients/workstations you are going to serve and how much space each mailbox/account will hold.

IMHO, system memory and drive I/O are more important that cpu numbers/speed.

 

[SuperNaruto]

I always thought of exchange as a memory hog... i like more memory but pick middle of the pack in processor speed..

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: Noubourne
To be actually helpful (shocking from me I know), here are some links you probably SHOULD use for information about this purchase:

Microsoft on Exchange Server req's

This looks fairly unbiased (most benchies you find are from a server manufacturer - HP, Dell, Sun, etc).

How about MS Exchange team blog? (for 2007).

Exchange Server Benches from Microsoft

Thanks for the links and being a prick.

Funny, I always thought Anandtech was a place where we could pose these types of technical questions.

And just because it bothers you so much, AT was the last place I came after consulting my sales reps and colleagues.

 

[abs0lut3]

I agree.

That was totally uncalled for and I always believed that any questions are warranted here unless the person is totally clueless to begin with.



I would not use anything from Microsoft for making decision about building my server because their testing environment does not always reflect real time usage.

Those information would help, however, you should never based entirely upon it.

You should be comparing your own performance data with your own setup under your own environment.

Dual core would be fine in the short run.

However, in the long run, you will eventually have to convert to quad core once you start to adopt newer software along with perhaps vista compatibility which will:
a. Cost you more money; even though the quad processor is probably cheaper at this point, it is still additional cost above of what you purchase for the dual plus the motherboard might not be compatible either (which means more $$$ for the motherboard)
b. Cost you time; changing the processor will require downtime. With all your finger crossed, the server might be back in no time but never say never, right?
c. Cost you grief if a and b do not work out like you think on paper.

You also have to remember that even though the quad is running 2Ghz, it is really running a fast and efficient 2Ghz granted that half of the cores are not being used most of the time but it is there when you need it.

Pair them up with a decent amount of memories and you are set.

Good luck with your build.