Re: Virtual TS on this SBS Box

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

I've seen comments now about processor speed and CPU idle time, but the problem isn't the CPU. Hosting an application on TS is a memory intensive endeavor and the disks *will* be swapping. That puts you in a scenario where you can get memory and I/O bound. The problem is that, although CPU's have certainly changed quite a bit since 2003 (SBS's release), hard drives haven't.

Sure, we now have a new generation of SATA drives with burst speeds up to 3GB, but on a server you need throughput, not burst. And that hasn't changed much since the late 90's. Spindles can only spin so fast, and density on platters has only 'crept' up since then, so speed also 'creeps' up, not leaps up. Particularly when hosting a large app, like outlook or MS Access, I've seen a standalone TS machine with 2 gigs of ram start swapping heavily at around 15 users. Now performance didn't take a big hit, but again, this was a standalone box. You put that on SBS, where it is probably already swapping for exchange, and even if you *dedicated* two gigs to Virtual Server, you will still be I/O bound faster than you can blink an eye.

Hardware is cheap these days. If you can afford the CAL's to run TS for 15 users (roughly $1500) then I can't see why you can't justify another $600 to build the box to run them on. Don't get me wrong, I know money doesn't grow on trees, but usually if you are looking at TS as a solution at all, it means the business has reached a size where TS makes more sense than individual deployment...and there should be *some* IT budget availabe to do it 'right.'

Just my opinion.

-Cliff

"leew [MVP]" <useContactPage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:483c2458$0$11629$607ed4bc@xxxxxxxxx
Leythos wrote:
In article <7D7F0935-7412-443B-9B21-B413ADA93271@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
I understand your concern but as listed it seems with 4GB ram the box would not even be using half in its current implementation, leaving plent for a V TS. I would go as far to say if it had 2GB of ram then it would be running no different.
2003 SBS allows for 75 users and sql with exchange, all within the 4GB limiation. This is massively more than a 10 user Exchange/TS environment running basic apps would need I'm pretty sure?

Wait will you have 10 users and SBS on the same single CPU box and see how well it doesn't perform.

I should point out, the box I had with 1 GB of RAM also had a celeron 2.4 GHz Processor. And again, that was with 15 users.

-Lee

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: is 333Mhz-400Mhz a LOT of overclocking?
    ... gotten to the point of confusion with Fsb, memory and cpu speeds. ...
    (alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt)
  • Re: win xp to win 7....other post refuses my replies
    ... I just ordered another fan with higher speed. ... CPU and the Heatsink/fan that you had installed. ... voltages alone, right now the core voltage is 1.192 and sometimes ... had to adjust it to get the right speeds. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: OT: CPUs
    ... with a lot of computer expertise that read t.o., ... Money tradeoffs? ... And spring the most amount of money for a CPU ... improvements in FSB speeds, another 100-150$ will be well spent. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: OT: CPUs
    ... Money tradeoffs? ... And spring the most amount of money for a CPU ... because you'll be obsolete-proofing your purchase, ... improvements in FSB speeds, another 100-150$ will be well spent. ...
    (talk.origins)