New VMware Server - Quad Core Intel, 4gb RAM, 400 gig RAID, etc
I’ve been brewing up a plan to save power and reduce the number of computers I have laying around, as well as increase my productivity. I mentioned before that I used to have 3 computers running 24/7 until I realized that I was paying hundreds of dollars a year in electricity.
In an effort to further consolidate my computers, I’m building a massive server that will do all the grunt work I need it to do very efficiently. I’m going to be running VMware server, which can run multiple independent virtual machines simultaneously. So basically, I’ll have 1 machine that acts as my development machine, 1 that runs as a build server, and 1 that serves up mail, source control, and files. I can run that single machine 24/7 and connect in with other computers. It doesn’t matter how powerful those machines are since they’ll be used as dummy terminals.
I already do a lot of work inside of virtual environments, so it won’t be much of a shock. For example, I have a virtual machine for my taxes each year. I have another virtual machine that has software on it to do video and audio trans-coding. Using the new server for these tasks will now be faster than doing them right on my own computer.;
Through the beauty of VMware, I can replace multiple machines (3 or 4 in this case). Each one will effectively be as fast as the server itself (or at least one of the cores). That’s due to the 4 cores and 4 gigs of memory that I have planned. For example, I expect compiling in Visual Studio 2005 to be faster than my crappy Pentium D.
I can’t build the machine until June 22nd. That’s when the Intel Core 2 Quad processor is expected to drop down to $266, which is an absolute bargain. I plan on using good parts that should allow me to overclock it to well over 3 gigahertz! That’s a total of 12GHz of computing power. Since the architecture blows away the Pentium 4, it’s probably like having a 15-20GHz P4. That is, of course, assuming you can utilize it.
As far as power is concerned, I’m trying to get a very efficient power supply. Doing the math, I’m realizing that can have a large impact on how much it actually costs to run the machine.
If you want to see a live version of my notes and price list, you can view it at the following Google Spreadsheet page:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p-fn01PSjtXuuI9uz7emDFQ
I’ll have more details of this beast to follow.
Interesting. I’m thinking of doing the same thing more or less, but I will be reusing my current case (very large), and adding the 5 disk enclosure outlined at the url below, and using one of the p35 motherboards to setup a large RAID array. Probably Gigabyte or Asus. I’m kind of leaning towards Asus, because that’s what my current motherboard is. http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=539&page=4
I’ve had my new server up and running for a couple of weeks now. It was definitely a great purchase.
I was also waiting for 266$ bargain
Now I am placing orders.
I am buying an intel DQ965GF mainboard. Mainly because of sata controller and vpro. With vpro I will have the option to make power on/off and some monitoring stuff even the OS is non responsive. I plan to have 3 independent Raid1 in the feature. Currently I will have only one. I am using win2003 both for host and guest OSes. I will have one SQL Server, One Build Server with SVN, one staging server. I will stick to 3gb ram. On 32bit OS 4gb seems to be a waste according to many vendor comments.
I plan to use real partitions for sql database files. I think it will be much more faster. I didnt verify it though.
Did you configure your guest systems as 2 processors or one ? Also if you have any suggestions I would be happy to hear.
Have good time with your server(s) …
I used Ubuntu 64 bit and went with 4gb and I’m glad I did. The more memory the better. I actually don’t plan on upgrading to the quad core. The dual core overclocked to 3gHz SCREAMS, even with the 4-5 machines I typically have running. However, if I was building a new machine like you, I would definitely go with the quad core for that price.
I actually already came up with a performance list: http://www.superjason.com/archive/2007/05/30/vmware-performance-testing-with-msbuild-and-dotnet.aspx
I found that assigning a single processor per virtual machine is definitely the way to go, unless you’re running something that can use 2 cores and is not very memory or disk intensive.
Hey SJ: I don’t need all that power and I’m trying to save some cash so will this work http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030 in the same slot as the Crapium D? Got another suggestion??
I would go with any Core 2 Duo. The speed isn’t too important, and if it is, I would overclock it.
Right now the 4400 can be had for about $125 on newegg.
I am thinking of doing the same thing also, but with 8 to 16 gb of ram and slicing up the system more. The question is to go to the server board and redundant PS or a desktop board with a good single power supply? How are you also connecting to the server? Straight through the console or using another Workstation…?
More RAM is definitely nice.
I guess the board question just depends how much downtime you can live with.
I try to never use the server directly. I always access it remotely. It feels safer that way for some reason.
Will running multiple Virtual Machines on on PC use more power?
I’m sure it does. It would run the processor and hard drives more. However, it would typically be such small amounts that it doesn’t really matter.
I`m planning to buy a quad core Q6600,
any suggestions that tells not to buy it?
Will using the core 2 quad with WMware 6 workstation enhance the performance more than core 2 duo?
Will the application recognise & use the 4 cores?
Quad cores is a great way to go. If you’re running 4 machines or less, you basically have a processor dedicated to each one.
VMware definitely recognizes the processors if you have multiple machines running.
Obviously mileage may vary depending on exactly what you’re doing in the virtual machines.
O Vmware utiliza os 4 processadores do Quad Core? Pois na minha maquina virtual consigo ativar apenas 02 processadores.
The Vmware uses the 4 processors of Quad Core? Because in my virtual machine can activate only 02 processors.
Quad cores are pretty useless if you’re running one virtual machine. But running VMware would be pretty useless as well.
You’ll have 4 cores to use, so you could run 2 dual core virtual machines for example. Even if you don’t have a quad core machine, you can still do that, but the extra cores could be well utilized in this scenario.
I just bought a Q6600, ASUS P5N-E, 320GB SATA Drive, and 4GB of RAM. I installed Ubuntu and VMWare Server 2.0 beta. The new interface for VMWare Server looks very much like ESX’s virtual client. One thing that I noticed that is different is that the memory usage is 3.48GB out of 3.88GB with no VMs loaded. I was able to make (2) VMs and run them simultaneously - 1GB per VM) with no real difference reported at the host level. Normally in ESX the memory usage is extremely low until you power up a VM. Any thoughts. I’m guessing that the ESX linux-type boot partition has a special Kernel that limits it to only consuming 100-200MB RAM max and it leaves the rest for the actual VMs.
I’m not sure how accurate that memory reporting is. I wouldn’t worry about it too much unless you’re having performance issues. Caching can account for a lot of memory usage, even when it’s not really a bad thing.
I’m new to VMware, I’m having the following config Intel Quad 2.4Ghz and Intel DP35DP motherboard. 4GB Transcend 800, Two seagate Baracuda 250GB drives attached. I’m trying to install VWware ESX 3.5 and getting no where …. It gets stuck on the driver screen saying that I dont have drivers. Any help would be greatly appreciated
I setup the following last year:- Gigabyte P35C-DSR / Q6600 / 8gb / Centos 5 64 Bit. VMWARE Server (now 2 RC1) 3×500gb HDD (no raid) It runs like a rocket. I have a few windows guests but mostly 32bit linux.
I use it as sandpit to run Oracle Apps with 2 Applications server nodes and 1 database node. 2 small problems the original BIOS failed to handle the SATA DVD drive correctly. Resolved in later version. The original Intel CPU fan was crap . I put a Thermaltake Typhoon . The next step is try overclock it