Re: Windows on Xeon 64bit or Pentium?

By the way , do you know any software which will help test Fileserver performance. It will be good if it will have client and server.


MarcusPERFOMACERobert Moir wrote:
MarcusB wrote:

If server is running only as a File server( no other application) in
a Active directory domain does 64 Windows on Xeon will perform twice
faster than windows 32bit on the same Xeon CPU?


No. While it can be argued that 64 bit windows can operate more efficiently in some ways, it isn't going to equate to 'twice as fast'. On areas where the job is something that 32 bit systems are struggling to cope with, the speed increase from a properly laid out 64 bit machine may well be twice as fast or more, but this most certainly doesn't mean a general doubling of speed.

For a start, this assumes that the only thing holding back your current system is the processor and the amount of memory it can address and this isn't usually the case for general use, certainly not for a file server, which is far more likely to be waiting for disks.


The domain controler is working on another server, the server with
Xeon CPUS is only Fileserver nothing more. What advantages I will get
to run Windows 64 bit?


At the moment, for the scenario you describe, probably very little.


So far I got only problems when testing windows R" 64 bits, hanging,
some SCSI card not working (the old adaptec 2940WU)
SATA raid problems.
It is Proliant 4Gp with two Xeon CPUs. It have smart Array with two 72
320 SCSI disks. As a extra disk we added for SATA disks (4 x Seagate
400GB) on Adaptec Sata II RAID 1420SA card.
8 SCSI 76 GB discs connected to Adaptec 2940UW adapter in extenal
enclosure.

Any advice?


If the 32 bit server performs adequately then I'd stick with that. A file server is more likely to be constrained by disk performance than processor and memory (especially with SATA drives, which often can't sustain high throughput to the extent SCSI drives can, unless you spend a lot of money on a top of the range controller and set of disks)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: sata or sas? performance greatly increased with sas?
    ... I've not used the 1680 but Areca's 1261ML (SAS) controller rocks. ... series instead if they plan to only connect SATA disks to them by ... some important areas and server optimized firmware) and a pretty good ...
    (comp.arch.storage)
  • Re: SATA vs SCSI
    ... >> another server to host SQL Server and Exchange. ... we managed to fill the 600GB volume so bought another Sil3112 SATA ... > o Creating RAID-0 array in the BIOS froze but appeared to create the array ... Your mention of the Adaptec host adapter packing up suggests that it might ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage)
  • Re: sata or sas? performance greatly increased with sas?
    ... I've not used the 1680 but Areca's 1261ML (SAS) controller rocks. ... series instead if they plan to only connect SATA disks to them by ... some important areas and server optimized firmware) and a pretty good ...
    (comp.arch.storage)
  • Re: Windows on Xeon 64bit or Pentium?
    ... For a start, this assumes that the only thing holding back your current system is the processor and the amount of memory it can address and this isn't usually the case for general use, certainly not for a file server, which is far more likely to be waiting for disks. ... 320 SCSI disks. ... As a extra disk we added for SATA disks (4 x Seagate ... 400GB) on Adaptec Sata II RAID 1420SA card. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)
  • Re: HP Proliant ML115 G5 : Five SATA drives with only four sockets?
    ... looking to put Ubuntu Server on it for a home backup system/email ... My M/board only seems to have four SATA sockets on it. ... Just get larger hard drives. ... files can be on single disks. ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)