Is this statement about Xeon v. regular P4's and Opterons v. regular a64's correct?

[Stoneburner]

THey are basically the same proccessors but AMD and INTEL only allow their server/workstation processors to have multiple chips on a single board. They only differentiated desktop chips and server/workstation chips so they could charge a premium to Business customers.

thanks in advance.

as a follow up question... i'm currently working in a small little law firm and I suspect there is little on the file server besides legal documents that need transferring around. Would there be any reason to purchase a new 5000 dollar file server as a certain tech guy is asking them to do?

P.S., this tech guy uses Intel only because of "stability issues"

 

[Markfw]

P.S., this tech guy uses Intel only because of "stability issues"

What a moron. Have him check tomshardware. Even though in the real world, I say they are equal, that does show that for bleeding edge computers, AMD is currently a little more stable, due to the lack of heat, and the mature platform.

 

[imported_wyrmrider]

Stability issue?
the only stability issue is his!

have him read the stress test at WWW>TOMSHARDWARE>COM
AND the comment thread here

A legal document server should not take a lot of horsepower
EDIT unless you are running ORACLE
FIRST backup strategy
(mirror whole system)
second recovery
third redundancy- raid
lots of memory
fourth ups with power conditioning
fifth keep it away from the internet

sixth fast disk array
etc
Intel NIC card (s)
5000$$$ let's see a proposal
what software?

wyrmrider

 

[Continuity27]

Anyone who states they use Intel for stability reasons is living in the past. You need to enlighten these people. They may have their reasons, but they must also move with the times... Intel is not supreme right now, the PC industry moves fast. Tell them to get used to it.

 

[Furen]

the Dies are the same, but the cpus are packaged differently. If you bought a server based on a regular chip you probably wouldnt really take any "stability" hits.

If the lawfirm simply needs a file server, then any computer with almost any cpu will be enough. The thing to look into is the quality of all the other components, including the motherboard, ram, and powersupply. If you buy the crappiest (and cheapest) stuff around then your system might work fine, or it might be insanely unstable. Another VERY important thing to look into is data security. Backing up data onto DURABLE removable media (no backing up onto floppies ^^) is especially important because harddrives do die once in a while.

That being said, there should be somewhat cheap servers (with or without server cpus) that can fit their needs. As much as I would like recommending buying a cheap generic system, it's always nice to have a company to give you support (and other people to blame, lol) when something goes wrong. One thing, though, is that if they want to use windows with the server, they should get windows xp pro, rather than windows server (which is overkill for a file server).

The only reason to buy insanely expensive servers is if you actually have NEED for them, if you want to serve a webpage with thousands of simultaneous hits then buy a $5000 server, otherwise, most lowend servers will do fine. If the tech continues to pressure them to buy such an insanely overpriced server without giving any substancial evidence that there is actually need for one such, then I'd suggest getting another tech or asking around at local computer stores.

 

[Lonyo]

Xeons aren't the same as P4's. The Pentium 4 EE was based on the Xeon cores IIRC.
Opterons are slightly different, they require ECC memory (but I think the normal AMD64's could have this), they also have more HTT links I think, but basically it's the same architecture with some tweaks.
The base architecture of Xeon and P4 and of Athlon 64 and Opterons are the same, but there are changes here and there. I think the Opterons are probably more similar to Athlon 64's than Xeons are to P4's though.

 

[Stoneburner]

I'll take a look at what tech guy is proposing, should be worth a few laughs at least. what about the first part? I've done very little reading on xeon's but I remember when the FX 51 first dropped they said it was just an opteron with a few bridges disabled to prevent using them as multi processors. Isn't this basically the same thing companies do with software, add a few useless features, call it "enterprise" or "business edition " and charge 5 x the price?

 

[Stoneburner]

THis is what he's proposed

pentium 4 3.4 ghz (i'm guessing xeon)
2g ddr sdram
intel mobo with onboard intel 10/100 nic video and audio
adaptec dual channel scsi card
seagate 72 gb ultra 160 scsi drive
sonly 40/104 ait tape drive
sony cd rom (im guessing this is eating most of the costs )
MS windows 2003 Small business server 15 user operating system
CA brighstor backup software for MS SBS
GFI mail essentials anti spam 25 user
diskeeper and auto defrag software
PC anywhere remote diagnostic software
5 pack sony AIT 40/104 tapes
and to top it off.. 17 inch CRT monitor!

he's charging 5700 for all this. FOr $976 more he'll update to a raid 5 hard drive system and redudant power supply. ANd he's charging about $2600 for labor too. Now there are about 4 lawyers here and maybe 6 or 7 secretaries and para legals. I get the impression this is overkill.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
THis is what he's proposed

pentium 4 3.4 ghz (i'm guessing xeon)

...

he's charging 5700 for all this. FOr $976 more he'll update to a raid 5 hard drive system and redudant power supply. ANd he's charging about $2600 for labor too. Now there are about 4 lawyers here and maybe 6 or 7 secretaries and para legals. I get the impression this is overkill.

No, I bet he means Pentium. That's not only overkill, but also way more expensive than the stuff actually costs ($2600 for labor on top of that is ridiculous if all he's doing is building the thing and installing stuff).

Checking Dell's site, you could get a basic server with P4 2.8GHz, 160GB SATA, Windows Server 2003 SBS, tape drive, backup software, 1GB RAM, etc. for around US$1700. With additional software, an extra hard disk, and plenty of tape media, you should still come in well south of US$3000. For the keyboard, mouse, and monitor, just borrow one to set the thing up, and once it's running you can use terminal services for remote administration to obviate the need for such space-consuming items.

 

[ND40oz]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
THis is what he's proposed

pentium 4 3.4 ghz (i'm guessing xeon)
2g ddr sdram
intel mobo with onboard intel 10/100 nic video and audio
adaptec dual channel scsi card
seagate 72 gb ultra 160 scsi drive
sonly 40/104 ait tape drive
sony cd rom (im guessing this is eating most of the costs )
MS windows 2003 Small business server 15 user operating system
CA brighstor backup software for MS SBS
GFI mail essentials anti spam 25 user
diskeeper and auto defrag software
PC anywhere remote diagnostic software
5 pack sony AIT 40/104 tapes
and to top it off.. 17 inch CRT monitor!

he's charging 5700 for all this. FOr $976 more he'll update to a raid 5 hard drive system and redudant power supply. ANd he's charging about $2600 for labor too. Now there are about 4 lawyers here and maybe 6 or 7 secretaries and para legals. I get the impression this is overkill.

That's rediculous, I can get a rackmounted dual xeon hp dl380 for that. The scsi drive is slow, i'd go with an ultra320 not a 160. Sounds like you probably don't need all that though, you'd be best off buying a server from HP or Dell and then having him set it up for you. That way you're not relying on him solely for hardware support should you have hardware problems. Granted, he'll be calling the parts in, but atleast with Dell or HP, they'll be overnighting the parts to you, rather then him waiting on an RMA from whereever he bought the parts from.

 

[ProviaFan]

This begs the question: what exactly is included in that labor charge? I'm not terribly familiar with what costs are in this business, but that does sound a bit high for what it sounds like he'll be doing.

 

[imported_wyrmrider]

hi
small law firm
this is overkill- unless you are running oracle
either do as the posters said and get an hp or sun
or get two and hook em together with a gigabit lan
I do not even think you need scsi
find some benchmarks on your software
typically on these systems the workstations are doing most of the work and this machine is for backup and storage
are multiple people editing (writing) the same file at the same time
using lotus notes?
serving the typical law citation and boilerplate systems is typically a small use

this is not transaction processing!

wyrmrider


go for reliability
speed is a non issue

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
THey are basically the same proccessors but AMD and INTEL only allow their server/workstation processors to have multiple chips on a single board. They only differentiated desktop chips and server/workstation chips so they could charge a premium to Business customers.

thanks in advance.

as a follow up question... i'm currently working in a small little law firm and I suspect there is little on the file server besides legal documents that need transferring around. Would there be any reason to purchase a new 5000 dollar file server as a certain tech guy is asking them to do?

P.S., this tech guy uses Intel only because of "stability issues"

I cannot remember where I saw the article, but sever versions of desktop chips go through extra testing and screening before they are labeled opteron or xeon. Those chips run much more stable and cooler at the same MHz when compaired to their desktop cousins. It's like compairing a Ford F150 to a Ford F250, they are the same through out, but the other is intended and tested to work in a commercial enviroment. Also sever versions are less likely to generate errors. It's Fact.

Originally posted by: wyrmrider
hi
small law firm
this is overkill- unless you are running oracle
either do as the posters said and get an hp or sun
or get two and hook em together with a gigabit lan
I do not even think you need scsi
find some benchmarks on your software
typically on these systems the workstations are doing most of the work and this machine is for backup and storage
are multiple people editing (writing) the same file at the same time
using lotus notes?
serving the typical law citation and boilerplate systems is typically a small use

this is not transaction processing!

wyrmrider


go for reliability
speed is a non issue

go for reliability

He needs scsi, not for the performance but for the reliablity and durabilty. Important data will be stored on those drives. Considering that his boss is making $500 an hour or more; the cost of SCSI is chump change. The data stored on those drives has a much higher monetary value.

Go with a small SUN Opteron Server, they are just as reliable as any Server Built by Intel (yes Intel builds servers just like HP and DELL). Sun servers are cost effective and have good support.

The tech is right, listen to his wisdom; reliabilty is key here and opteron/xeon and scsi is the most reliable soulution you can find when combined with ecc. Nothing would be worse than saving a few $ and finding out in 6 months that an important doccument is lost or damaged. Lawyers make millions, so $500-1,000 over the 5 year life of this server is nothing they will miss or sweat about.

Calm Down Fanboys!

 

[Googer]

All of you have great knowledge of what it takes to build a desktop pc and make it perform better than anything else out there, but I doubyt you really know much about the needs, reasons, and requirements for commercial computing. It is a completly differant philosophy.


One example is:
SCSI drives are small and have lower aerial densities when compaired to their IDE (Intergrated Drive Electronics*) Hard Drive cousins. The reason being is data e stored at higer densitys is much more at risk: prone to data errors and corruption. Lower densities are safer. Safety is the key. SCSI drives are built using better motors (better than most power tools). The list can go on and I do not have time to tell them all.

*Early Drives did not have electronics on the drive it's self. The first drives to move the basic electronics off the controler and motherboard were called IDE. Now these days all hard drives can be classified as IDE (SCSI, SATA, ATA/PATA)

 

[Brunnis]

Originally posted by: Googer
I cannot remember where I saw the article, but sever versions of desktop chips go through extra testing and screening before they are labeled opteron or xeon. Those chips run much more stable and cooler at the same MHz when compaired to their desktop cousins.

The server chips do not run cooler than their desktop cousins. If they use the same voltage and run at the same frequency, they're going to output the same amount of heat.

 

[ProviaFan]

Calm down Googer! I would never suggest a self-built system for this usage. If they want SCSI and are willing to pay for it, Dell will give it to them for a good bit less than this fellow is charging. We don't really have enough information to know the details of what's being proposed, but it sounds like some local shop that is going to throw this thing together and load some software on it and hope it works. Even Dell would be a great improvement, though if they don't mind spending as much money as this "tech" is charging, they can certainly get an Opteron from Sun and have a much better system for the same cost (and sans the seemingly ridiculous labor charge).

 

[PlatinumGold]

Stoneburner

I do this kind of stuff for a living, doctors and lawyers offices are 90% of my business.

if i were in CA i'd offer to help you out, but as i'm in NJ all i can offer is this, send me the whole quote (my email in my profile) and i'll tell you what i think is fair and what is too much.

btw, not all the comments made in this thread are valid because they haven't seen his whole quote and don't know what service it is he's providing.

btw, if he is installing GFI Mail essentials, i'm going to have to think you are also going to be running some kind of mail server on this, hence it isn't just a file server.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Brunnis

Originally posted by: Googer
I cannot remember where I saw the article, but sever versions of desktop chips go through extra testing and screening before they are labeled opteron or xeon. Those chips run much more stable and cooler at the same MHz when compaired to their desktop cousins.

The server chips do not run cooler than their desktop cousins. If they use the same voltage and run at the same frequency, they're going to output the same amount of heat.

I am not going to debate this, but it is true. Athlon MP's are a good example. Get some and try it for your self. Then Compaire it to Athlon XP in the same motherboard.

The multiprocessor version of the same chip has gone through aditional testing and that is the reason why they cost so much more. Only the best chips out of a batch ever make it or qualify being called xeon/opteron or what ever they are or may be called in the future. Call them Golden Samples if you will.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Tomshardware is an unreliable site, and most people agree to it, EXCEPT that when they talk negative about Intel, people believe it.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
Tomshardware is an unreliable site, and most people agree to it, EXCEPT that when they talk negative about Intel, people believe it.

Do you have a link?

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Googer

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
Tomshardware is an unreliable site, and most people agree to it, EXCEPT that when they talk negative about Intel, people believe it.

Do you have a link?

Read their recent "stress test" (well, at least the conclusion) of dual core processors from Intel and AMD and draw your own conclusion.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
Tomshardware is an unreliable site, and most people agree to it, EXCEPT that when they talk negative about Intel, people believe it.

My impression is that the reason people are upset is because THG didn't talk negative ENOUGH about Intel...

To put it another way...they continuously understate Intel's faults and overstate AMD's faults. They are proudly biased to the point where a used car salesman looks quite respectable by comparison!