Xeon vs Opteron for VMWare GSX server

[snappahdee]

Hello-

We are considering using VMWare GSX Server running on Linux for testing our software, and I'm trying to figure out if a dual Xeon or Opteron based system will be better for us. The Guest OS's will largely be Windows. Performance is not the critical thing here, as our tested applications are largely web based with only a few users clicking on pages every few seconds. What we're after is compatibility testing with different environments, and possibly consolidating some other low use servers into VMWare.

We are mostly an Intel shop, but I'm noticing Opteron gaining favorable reviews, so I thought I'd consider AMD for this application.

The target machines will likely be:

Option 1:
Dual Xeon 3.2/533mhz 1mb cache
4gb RAM
4x72 SATA drives

Option 2:
Dual Opteron 2.2 200 series
4gb RAM
4x72 SATA drives

I would consider Opteron if I can get a few more VM sessions out of the hardware. I called VMWare and they said I can get an extra 1-2 images per CPU running if my CPUs are HyperThreaded, but he could not comment on Opteron.

Is anyone running either of these types of platforms for VMWare GSX? How many concurrent guest imges are you running?

Any real world experience is greatly appreciated.

 

[Vette73]

I would go Opteron as it has been proven to be fast and stable. Evem anandtech.com is going to use the Opteron in some of its servers, check out the main page. Also it should be a hair chaper to build, depending on the chips and boards you use.

 

[Peter D]

Opteron.

 

[snappahdee]

Thanks for the recommendations, however are they based on any data or just personal preference?

In my research, only the Xeon offers any benefit asside from raw processing performance with the Hyperthreading technology that VMWare benefits from.

According to VMWare, with HT enabled processors, we can expect to run an extra 1 to 2 guest OS's per CPU.

Anyone else have any data or real world experiences?

Thanks!

 

[batmanuel]

Just check out the Opteron vs. Xeon cmparison Anand has on the front page of this website right now. The Xeon's biggest issue is the fact that SMP Xeons all share the same FSB connection to the RAM, whereas the Opterons have on die memory controllers and each processor has its own dedicated RAM. In a dualie situation, the Xeon isn't hurt too badly since its large chace can buffer the performance hit in a dual processor situation. (This mainly seems to be why Xeons have such huge caches), and depending on the situation application the Xeon 3.2/533 chips and the Opteron 248s are pretty similar in performance.

Four way and eight way SMP is where the Opteron really shines, since four Xeons pretty much cause a trainwreck of data on the motherboard's FSB, while Opterons scale much more gracefully when you start doing some serious multiprocessing. I'd say for your application, the Xeon might be a bit better as the Hyperthreading will probably help the Xeon get a leg up on a 248-based machine. Plus, the Xeon 3.2/533 is cheaper than the 248 right now as well.

Here's the page where Anand talks about the FSB bottlenecking Xeon scalabilty. Interesting stuff. For once, it seem like the AMD product seems like it's more well suited for really high end enterprise-level servers, more of a competitor for the Itanium than the Xeon in some respects. I'll bet the Opteron keeps a lot of Intel exec up at night, because it has the potential to steal away a lot of the server market from Intel in the next few years, especially if the 64-bit OS market matures before Intel's x86-64 compatable processor is fully ready for market. As you can see from Anand's article, just slapping some 64-bit registers on a Xeon is not gonna allow Intel to fully compete with the Opteron in the server market unless Intel starts to make some other changes as well, such as on die memory controllers.

 

[myocardia]

The 64-bit OS is already well-established in the server market. It's called Linux. And running dual or quad Opterons in 64-bit Linux will destroy dual or quad Xeons in 32-bit Linux. But, if it isn't fiscally possible or feasible to for your company to convert to the 64-bit version, I say that it makes more sense to go with the Xeons. Of course, if it's a close call, I would definitely make the switch to 64-bit, since it's becoming more and more of a necessity every day, and that's where the Opterons are really going to shine.

 

[TechSerf]

Just attended a presentation by VMWare at our local network users group meeting this week and this very questions was asked. The sales engineer and developer both giving the presentation said that while AMD processors (XP and Opteron) were fine for use with VMWare due to their x86 compatibility. The VM Ware people then went on to mention that only Intel CPU's had been validated for use with VMWare and that Intel based systems were what most of their customers were running VMWare on (not surprising given some of their client base). The HT issue was brought up as well and both VMWare speakers mentioned it did provide a benefit in running the software. Again they didn't rule out it running on AMD chips on either Linux or Windows (the same ambiguity you got from your call to them basically), they just had not performed any validation testing on these platforms unlike Intel.

I think you will be fine either way, but as much as I like AMD for my personal use I'd have to give the nod to Intel for what you are trying to do. Hope this helps.

 

[Soulkeeper]

i second the opteron bid
linux loves athlons

 

[snappahdee]

Any chance that running 64bit linux on Opterons would have any benefit for running 32bit VM images of Windows 2000/2003?