Help in choosing AMD FX-53 or Dual Opteron

[macmedia]

I am in a slight bind right now.

I need to setup a storage server - approx 2.4TB (12- 200gb drive) Raid. I using it with a Promise Escalade 8500-12 board. There is choice in using it with a single or dual processor so I am left to choose between:


Single Processor 2.4ghz Athlon 64 FX-53
or
Dual Processor 1.8ghz Opteron.


Being that this computer will be using in ONLY these tasks, what do you think will be the best option in CPU for me?

1) raid storage server
2) scanning station - scanning in about 2 million documents and OCR each one (the OCR software needs max CPU power BUT if run in dual CPU mode, it runs 30% faster than single CPU mode)
3) occassionally running photoshop
4) low usage web server


Thanks for any insights!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Dual Opteron.

 

[Markfw]

Dual Opteron seems like a nobrainer based on what I see, but how many users ? What is the budget ? What is the uptime expectations ? Is SCSI an option ?

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: macmedia
Being that this computer will be using in ONLY these tasks, what do you think will be the best option in CPU for me?

1) raid storage server

Dual CPUs are marginally better if running concurrent large I/Os (the controller/bus/disks will likely bottleneck you either way). If doing lots and lots of small I/Os, dual CPUs will help more.

2) scanning station - scanning in about 2 million documents and OCR each one (the OCR software needs max CPU power BUT if run in dual CPU mode, it runs 30% faster than single CPU mode)

Obviously, dual CPUs are better here.

3) occassionally running photoshop

Don't think you get too much benefit from dual CPUs in Photoshop, but maybe the more recent versions do?

4) low usage web server

Will have much better response times with dual CPUs, especially if the system is being used for other tasks simultaneously.

Thanks for any insights!

I'd go with the dual Opterons, even though the individual processors are slower. For a server that's doing multiple things simultaneously, dual CPUs are almost always a better choice.

 

[macmedia]

Thanks so far for the tips. - I forgot to mention - I will be using RAID level 5 for safe keeping of my documents.

I will be using SATA drives and no SCSI. 1 or 2 users on my Lan but the WAN (web server) - maybe at MOST 5-10 simultaneous users. Obviously, most people - including myself, would want as much uptime as possible.

Basically, I have a Mac G5. I have lots of files that I need to store. So I thought of configuring a RAID. Other than Apple's Raid solution (at 10k - too much for me), I am left to get a PC. Budget is a concern but I have some leeway. I'm thinking of setting up the PC and hooking it up to the Mac either via Gigabit EN (easier) or via Fiber Channel (preferred but not sure how to connect to a Mac with this yet).

So, with a semi-expensive box (around $4200), I thought that I should use it for more than just a raid. The web server would be good as I can get it off my Mac. The scanning station is important as I have a large project to scan and it ONLY runs on a PC. In this situation, the faster single processor 2.4ghz FX-53 is about the same performance as the Dual 1.8ghz Opteron. I'm really not sure if I have a lot of tasks or not being used in the PC.

The cost for the single FX-53 is about the same as the dual 1.8 Opteron in my case. I found some deals and so, with the cost about even, I want to find out the real world performance and which is preferred - slower Dual, or Faster single.

 

[Corporate Thug]

i'd get an opteron 148

 

[macmedia]

The opteron 148 can only work as a single processor solution - and is a bit slower than the FX-53 (2.4ghz)

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: macmedia
The opteron 148 can only work as a single processor solution - and is a bit slower than the FX-53 (2.4ghz)

yes, its a bit slower but it costs $404 and the Fx 53 costs $811

 

[SickBeast]

The duals are by far your best choice.

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: macmedia
The opteron 148 can only work as a single processor solution - and is a bit slower than the FX-53 (2.4ghz)

yes, its a bit slower but it costs $404 and the Fx 53 costs $811

good point, or at least get the 150, since its still $200 cheaper then the fx53?

 

[3chordcharlie]

But you want to use it as a storage server, and a workstation, form what I'm hearing.

You'll tank both photoshop and serving performance if you have a single processor compared to dual, necause you want it to do both at the same time.

You also get a good upgrade path with low-end opteron compared to the fx53, since at some point in the future you may well be able to buy 2 opterons at over 2.5ghz for less than a single fx53 costs now.

 

[Mik3y]

ya, in like 10 yrs!

 

[macmedia]

OK - so it looks like most of you say dual is better. BTW, I am able to get the dual 1.8 opterons for $575 (they only have the 2 for me) or FX-53 for $510. Both were removed from a working setup and are guaranteed. So, for the most part, the prices are about the same and I have no problem justifying for either one.