Dedicated Desktop vs. Dedicated Server

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

mitchelt

Senior member
Feb 3, 2000
781
1
76
Thank you all for the continuing valuable information, I've been copying/pasting it all into my Word doc for future reference.

I'll take a look at 10K RPM Drives, seems like investing money in them over a dual-cpu setup may be a better idea. As for the 32Gig vs. 16Gig...that's a pretty minor cost difference.

I believe we will probably go with Raid 1 and keep our offsite backup.

Thanks!
 

ArisVer

Golden Member
Mar 6, 2011
1,345
32
91
I think this has to do with your network setup... cables, NICs, switches and hubs. You better check and write down your company's network connections (ten computers are not many). Maybe you'll find that you are running CAT5 cables that have been there since the installation of the older file server. Without finding the bottleneck, getting a newer server will not solve your problems. I might be wrong and it could (also) be software related.


Edit.
If I get a server that can handle dual cpu's and start with one, can I add the 2nd one easily or do I have to reinstall the OS (probably Win Server 2012 Essentials)?

I would also like an answer here...anyone?
 
Last edited:

Ketchup

Elite Member
Sep 1, 2002
14,546
238
106
Server 2012 will have no problem accessing the extra cores (no re-install required). The other side to this is to make sure you have applications that will actually make use of the extra cores, or it will be a waste.
 

mitchelt

Senior member
Feb 3, 2000
781
1
76
I think this has to do with your network setup... cables, NICs, switches and hubs. You better check and write down your company's network connections (ten computers are not many). Maybe you'll find that you are running CAT5 cables that have been there since the installation of the older file server. Without finding the bottleneck, getting a newer server will not solve your problems. I might be wrong and it could (also) be software related.


Edit.


I would also like an answer here...anyone?

I can almost guarantee you that the cables in the building are at least 10-15 years old. I will make sure we test the cables in the building we are moving into to make sure they can handle 1Gig.
 

mitchelt

Senior member
Feb 3, 2000
781
1
76
Server 2012 will have no problem accessing the extra cores (no re-install required). The other side to this is to make sure you have applications that will actually make use of the extra cores, or it will be a waste.

Do you mean extra CPU as in a Dual CPU Server, or are you talking about the different versions of CPU's and the cores they have?

I assumed that all software would take advantage of Dual CPU's or is it more correct to say that Dual CPU's will help the overall performance of the server?
 

saratoga172

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2009
1,564
1
81
Do you mean extra CPU as in a Dual CPU Server, or are you talking about the different versions of CPU's and the cores they have?

I assumed that all software would take advantage of Dual CPU's or is it more correct to say that Dual CPU's will help the overall performance of the server?


If you initially get a single socket cpu and wish to upgrade by adding another cpu in the future the system will detect upon startup and make the necessary adjustments. No re install needed for that. I will caution you in that it is often not as easy or cost effective to go this route with servers. Either the cpu becomes discontinued making them hard to find or expensive, or the install process is not expected. They aren't exactly like a desktop system.

As for the software piece. Not all software is written to take advantage of multiple cores. The OS will without a doubt benefit but the apps run on it may only be able to use 2 or 4 for instance. Where it should help overall performance is if those 4 cores are used by one app and another uses a different set of 2 or 4. I still think your best performance would come from processor speed (GHz) over cores. So a 4c/8t 3.2ghz would probably be better than a 2.6ghz 6c/12t. Especially if you're going dual socket. Either way will be a huge upgrade and don't think you'll have any real issues.
 

saratoga172

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2009
1,564
1
81
I think this has to do with your network setup... cables, NICs, switches and hubs. You better check and write down your company's network connections (ten computers are not many). Maybe you'll find that you are running CAT5 cables that have been there since the installation of the older file server. Without finding the bottleneck, getting a newer server will not solve your problems. I might be wrong and it could (also) be software related.


Edit.


I would also like an answer here...anyone?


Adding the second cpu after install and production use should not impact the system negatively. The OS will update accordingly upon boot and you won't need to reinstall.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
We really need to know how much HDD space is being consumed and how much network bandwidth. You have to know those things before considering dropping multiple tens of grand on a server. The fix could be a simple network change, or a 256GB SSD.
 

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
Adding the second cpu after install and production use should not impact the system negatively. The OS will update accordingly upon boot and you won't need to reinstall.

On a modern Intel or AMD platform, you also need to add memory to the second CPU, either new DIMMs or by redistributing some from the first socket. Not a big deal, but something to keep in mind.
 

mitchelt

Senior member
Feb 3, 2000
781
1
76
We really need to know how much HDD space is being consumed and how much network bandwidth. You have to know those things before considering dropping multiple tens of grand on a server. The fix could be a simple network change, or a 256GB SSD.

The current server will not be moving with us to the new location, we will need to get a new one so that is why I am asking all the questions. Thanks.
 

mitchelt

Senior member
Feb 3, 2000
781
1
76
On a modern Intel or AMD platform, you also need to add memory to the second CPU, either new DIMMs or by redistributing some from the first socket. Not a big deal, but something to keep in mind.

Got it...thankfully memory is not too expensive.
 

krnmastersgt

Platinum Member
Jan 10, 2008
2,873
0
0
Depending on how the software handles the data writes, you won't want 10K RPM drives, you'll want an SSD. Far more responsive and sustained reads are very fast; the only downside in a server set-up for an SSD is if the workload is dealing with huge amounts of small file writes (though standard HDDs have trouble with this too) or that it writes and re-writes a huge amount of data over short periods of time, in which case you may kill the SSD rather quickly.

Since this is accounting software I would assume (could be wrong) that this is all just basic data entry and report generation, as the reports are likely just stored in RAM as the system is utilized and then dumped later, I see this as an ideal solution for an SSD.

In fact I think you may want to experiment with grabbing an SSD, and cloning the drive that's in the current machine. As the SSD can very easily be re-purposed into whatever server you end up buying/building, this would be a great way to see if maybe the generic 5400 RPM low capacity drive is just struggling to deal with the simultaneous read requests over different sectors on the drives.

The following is going to sound like a bit of a repeat of Bonzai's post here but this is my own thought process.

Based off the information I've read about the current machine, the number of current users hitting the system, and the issues you're having here's the breakdown I ran in my head:
1. CPU? Generic i5, but even a first gen i5 desktop CPU should be able to generate accounting reports fairly easily. Unless these reports are HUGE or involve thousands of entries (highly recommend you ask or investigate this) then likely not the issue.

2. RAM? 8GB is way more than enough for the guy using the system, and with only 3 concurrent users this again points to the size of the reports being generated or how long the software lets the data sit idly in the RAM before it dumps it. One thing to consider here though aside from the size of the reports it's generating is that it's likely storing this data, the software itself, AND whatever the current user is working on. 8GB for one person in an office environment is usually overkill but this could quickly lead to an issue in your configuration as then it relegates the overflow to a paging file on the HDD which ALWAYS makes operations dog slow.

3. HDD? Most likely culprit in my mind, when you're using a mechanical drive, have a current user, software that needs to constantly write/read to different sectors WHILE having multiple other people request data, a single mechanical drive is going to suffer a lot doing this. This is only made worse by the possible paging file overflow from the RAM possible issues.

4. Network? Networking can be a troublesome beast to deal with, as all equipment is rated in its max theoretical speed but realistically never hitting it. This being the issue is COMPLETELY reliant on the size of the data we're dealing with.

If these reports are ~10 MB (that's a lot of basic numbers/data when you really look at it) then over a fast ethernet connection the theoretical time would be <1 second. But realistically this'll take a couple of seconds, and with dated networking equipment anywhere in the chain this could take a minute or two, not something I'd say worth complaining about unless they need this information constantly being pulled.

If these reports are ~100MB or larger (that's HUGE for accounting reports/files imo) then the network could easily be an issue, as network connection speed for internal file transfers has a large number of variables to account for. Multiple people asking with dated networking equipment are going to be very annoyed if they need this data often as they'll spend most of their day waiting.


Sort of typed all that before looking into the most recent version of Sage 50, I only see these possibilities:
1. The guy using the station is running too many things concurrently and the memory is all used up, causing the accounting program to use paging files; not super likely but possible!
2. Most likely in my opinion is that the drive in this machine is rather slow, and trying to service multiple people numerous data fetch requests, while the guy is using it/accessing files on it, while the software does whatever it does in the background.

Solution to 1 is just isolating the machine, his machine would be overkill for the software if left alone for only Sage 50.
Solution to 2 is an SSD honestly, the near instant seek times for this environment is going to be extremely useful, and its read speed throughput is going to be a dramatic increase over your current drive.

tl;dr, grab an SSD and clone the guy's drive (though I'd recommend overprovisioning an buffer so he doesn't write amplify it to death, maybe format it with only 85 or 90% of the usable space) and see if that doesn't remedy the problem.
 

ArisVer

Golden Member
Mar 6, 2011
1,345
32
91
Suppose you found the problem and it is the HDD, wouldn't it better to add the SSD just to store and serve their data files?
 

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
Depending on how the software handles the data writes, you won't want 10K RPM drives, you'll want an SSD. Far more responsive and sustained reads are very fast; the only downside in a server set-up for an SSD is if the workload is dealing with huge amounts of small file writes (though standard HDDs have trouble with this too) or that it writes and re-writes a huge amount of data over short periods of time, in which case you may kill the SSD rather quickly.

Since this is accounting software I would assume (could be wrong) that this is all just basic data entry and report generation, as the reports are likely just stored in RAM as the system is utilized and then dumped later, I see this as an ideal solution for an SSD.

The conclusion of "buy an SSD" doesn't really follow from the use case that you described. If the program is working in memory and then occasionally writing out a data file to disk, then an HDD will do fine. This especially true when you consider the layers of caching that occurs on a CIFS share.

The more realistic case that would require an SSD is if there are many users constantly doing I/O against small parts of fairly data files. That's where the seek times of an HDD will kill performance.

But overall, we need some more data from the OP before making any sort of recommendation about where the performance bottlenecks are. Something like screenshots of all the tabs of Resource Monitor while the server is "being slow" would go a long way.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |