Fastest Quad core/ quad cpu machine available?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,852
6
81
How about just getting an i5 760 for $160 and OC that to 4.2 GHZ? Bet you that can outperform even a 980x in 99% of applications.

If he's doing number crunching, then accuracy is more important than raw speed from an OC'd processor. A Xeon with ECC RAM brings stability which is what you want if you're working on something serious. An OC'd 760 might be great for playing video games when you can get a few extra fps but it doesn't sound that it's what he's looking for here. You don't want a server that's doing serious work crashing at all or having any kind of errors.
 

PusBucket

Junior Member
Oct 30, 2004
7
0
0
How/why this would increase software licensing costs (running on how many machines?), by " ... solid 6 figures."

Thank you.


Licensing issues; anything over 4 cores bumps our cost by solid 6 figures. At that level is becomes a problem ... :)
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,856
4,974
126
How/why this would increase software licensing costs (running on how many machines?), by " ... solid 6 figures."

Thank you.

Most high-end server/database/boutique software is licensed per physical CPU (now its per core).... you in essence have to buy a license for each core. That high end stuff is NOT cheap per license to say the least.

KA-CHING to the max
 

Dravic

Senior member
May 18, 2000
892
0
76
How/why this would increase software licensing costs (running on how many machines?), by " ... solid 6 figures."

Thank you.

Its a big divide between hardware vendors and software vendors. The hardware vendors are trying their hardest to out do each other with more cores while the software vendors are trying to maintain there revenue stream against the mass migration to vitualization.

It has come to the point were you have to build a servers(well vm host) around licensing cost. We have even had to pay extra for IBM blades with JUST 4 cores (two sockets with dual core cpu's) so we stay under the enterprise licensing cost for software like Oracle and Lotus Notes.

We tell the vendors every time they come in that if they remove the 4 core blades as planned over the next few cycles that we will not be refreshing hardware, which will cost them money. Otherwise a $10,000 hardware life cycle change is going to cost us $100,000 - $200,000 MORE in software licensing

The two sides need to get together, because rather then being in lock step they are on diverging paths. The software vendors especially need to get off their high horse an accept virtual core counts as oppose to the number of total cores the entire vm host has. If i build a 16 core VM monster to host a dozen servers and only give the Virtual Oracle server 4 cores that should be acceptable. Currently its not, and the software vendors want us to pay for all 16 cores on the physical hardware underneath that VM which then forces you in the Enterprise level software license which can be 10x as expensive.
 
Last edited:

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
The software vendors especially need to get off their high horse an accept virtual core counts as oppose to the number of total cores the entire vm host has. If i build a 16 core VM monster to host a dozen servers and only give the Virtual Oracle server 4 cores that should be acceptable. Currently its not, and the software vendors want us to pay for all 16 cores on the physical hardware underneath that VM which then forces you in the Enterprise level software license which can be 10x as expensive.



Just curious, but how can they tell? In a VM, there shouldn't be any way for software running on that VM to see more CPU cores than you assign it.
 

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,852
6
81
Its a big divide between hardware vendors and software vendors. The hardware vendors are trying their hardest to out do each other with more cores while the software vendors are trying to maintain there revenue stream against the mass migration to vitualization.

It has come to the point were you have to build a servers(well vm host) around licensing cost. We have even had to pay extra for IBM blades with JUST 4 cores (two sockets with dual core cpu's) so we stay under the enterprise licensing cost for software like Oracle and Lotus Notes.

We tell the vendors every time they come in that if they remove the 4 core blades as planned over the next few cycles that we will not be refreshing hardware, which will cost them money. Otherwise a $10,000 hardware life cycle change is going to cost us $100,000 - $200,000 MORE in software licensing

The two sides need to get together, because rather then being in lock step they are on diverging paths. The software vendors especially need to get off their high horse an accept virtual core counts as oppose to the number of total cores the entire vm host has. If i build a 16 core VM monster to host a dozen servers and only give the Virtual Oracle server 4 cores that should be acceptable. Currently its not, and the software vendors want us to pay for all 16 cores on the physical hardware underneath that VM which then forces you in the Enterprise level software license which can be 10x as expensive.

Yeah sounds like Oracle all right. One company I had worked for was looking into getting an Oracle license for something or another, I forgot what offhand since this was 10 years ago, but I remember Oracle wanted my company to pay a fee for every single computer that the company had on the network - whether or not it would be using oracle, whether or not it even had the OS installed necessary to run it. Their licensing fees are sick and it's no wonder they are such a rich company.

As much as I hate to say it, the reason some of these companies stay afloat so long or even dominate a market can have more to do with their lawyer team than the actual software and hardware they pump out.
 

rgallant

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2007
1,361
11
81
How/why this would increase software licensing costs (running on how many machines?), by " ... solid 6 figures."

Thank you.

I work in card access control.
-the data base manager we used for years in our servers\workstations, built into our software- sold to our clients was a per server \workstation\client buy , like most software .
-the software co.[#1 or 2 in the world] in a user audit[us] wanted to start charging per active access card ,programed in every clients servers ,some office\towers \complex's ,average 5k. one site has 60,000 active \people\users\cards-so fee per card\person -not per site\cpu
-have no costing but the yearly user\card audits\man hours[cost alone] would have been unworkable -not to mention the fee's.[2mil ? cards min.]
-so we had to downgrade to a less than a wanted version.

-think of this site for every single user active ,this site would have to pay the software builder of this site a fee per year-per user that has joined it. lol
 

borisvodofsky

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2010
3,606
0
0
Its a big divide between hardware vendors and software vendors. The hardware vendors are trying their hardest to out do each other with more cores while the software vendors are trying to maintain there revenue stream against the mass migration to vitualization.

It has come to the point were you have to build a servers(well vm host) around licensing cost. We have even had to pay extra for IBM blades with JUST 4 cores (two sockets with dual core cpu's) so we stay under the enterprise licensing cost for software like Oracle and Lotus Notes.

We tell the vendors every time they come in that if they remove the 4 core blades as planned over the next few cycles that we will not be refreshing hardware, which will cost them money. Otherwise a $10,000 hardware life cycle change is going to cost us $100,000 - $200,000 MORE in software licensing

The two sides need to get together, because rather then being in lock step they are on diverging paths. The software vendors especially need to get off their high horse an accept virtual core counts as oppose to the number of total cores the entire vm host has. If i build a 16 core VM monster to host a dozen servers and only give the Virtual Oracle server 4 cores that should be acceptable. Currently its not, and the software vendors want us to pay for all 16 cores on the physical hardware underneath that VM which then forces you in the Enterprise level software license which can be 10x as expensive.

This is exactly the kind of bullshit that makes tech departments bloated and costly..

Google would've never took off if they used IBM mainframes. They had ghetto rigs, with a box fan...

GHETTO FTW... I CAN save people millions of dollars.. you can build a 5-6 redundant system for the price of 1 from dell or any big vendor. I highly doubt more than 2 of those 6 would fail.
 

Voo

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2009
1,684
0
76
GHETTO FTW... I CAN save people millions of dollars.. you can build a 5-6 redundant system for the price of 1 from dell or any big vendor. I highly doubt more than 2 of those 6 would fail.
You didn't get that he's talking about software, right? Hardware costs - even those rather expensive dells with included service (and you really don't want to do without in a large company) - are peanuts compared to some licensing fees of software out there.

Do you really care if you pay 1k or 5k$ for your hardware when the software runs somewhere in the higher 5-digits range?
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
You didn't get that he's talking about software, right? Hardware costs - even those rather expensive dells with included service (and you really don't want to do without in a large company) - are peanuts compared to some licensing fees of software out there.

Do you really care if you pay 1k or 5k$ for your hardware when the software runs somewhere in the higher 5-digits range?

7 digit range
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Boxx makes some of the best and fastest systems available. They don't compromise on quality or support, but that comes at a price. They are never cheaper than their competitors but in years of having used them have never had a single complaint. It is nice when you have a problem with a system and the support guy on the phone says, we can get you one shipped out overnight at no cost to you, just put your old system in the box and send it back in two weeks at our cost. And they gave that option at the beginning of the conversation not at the end as a last resort by telling me first thing that they will do their best but if they can't solve it what they will do.



http://www.boxxtech.com/products/Products.asp
 
Last edited: