Opinion on servers

[nomis135]

Hey all i'm looking at LayeredTech.com.

I want a server for no more than $135 with cpanel/whm

I was wondering which one you guys would suggest.

An Intel like this :

# Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz
# 80GB IDE Hard Drive
# 1024MB RAM
# Bandwidth: 1000GB
# IP Addresses: 8 (5 usable)
# Private VLAN
# Basic Resource Monitoring
# FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Windows*
# 100% Self Managed and Dedicated

or one of the first 3 AMD Plans here :

http://www.layeredtech.com/layer1.php?g=13

Thanks,
Simon

 

[Ray]

good choice

 

[ApocComputing]

Intel imho... i cant wait for the viiv... I hate the amd cores, never liked them, i owned 2 servers wit them, and i didnt have the same results of the = intel processor

1) ok we aren't talking about the "viiv". i agree intel's next generation of processors will be more competitive with AMD's, but as for the CURRENT generation running on Netburst, they blow monkey testicles. Intel has publicly admitted that they crippled the pipelines in their CPUs just to get a higher clockspeed. They designed these CPUs for marketing.

to add to this, why would Intel make the Napa(next gen CPUs) based on the older core architecture of the Pentium 3? Also, Intel released Pentium 4s, even though the Pentium 3 beat it in most benchmarks.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/05/25/dothan_over_netburst/ here is an article related to what i have just said. you dont have to look at every page, just the first page will convey to you what i am trying to get across...

Next time for a decision like this i would reccomend looking at a forum that is based around computer hardware. No offense intended but i would guess most people here just listen to the commercials and think Intel is way better than anything else.

I hate the amd cores, never liked them, i owned 2 servers wit them, and i didnt have the same results of the = intel processor

2) Oh really.. do you have any reasoning behind this?

i owned 2 servers wit them, and i didnt have the same results of the = intel processor

3) I am guessing you have reasoning to back this up. Just FYI, AMD CPUs do more per clock cycle than Pentium 4 CPUs. What do you mean by "results"? And what processors are you referring to as "=" processors. please, please explain this to me?...


-AMD Fanboy

 

[Ray]

as equal processor im comparing it to the p4 with the same ghz, @ 2.4. The Intel seemed to a higher load, and completed it faster.. What i said about AMD's is they a re good processors for desktops, not for servers..

 

[ApocComputing]

as equal processor im comparing it to the p4 with the same ghz, @ 2.4. The Intel seemed to a higher load, and completed it faster.. What i said about AMD's is they a re good processors for desktops, not for servers..

this could be possible, but is highly unlikely. an intel processor at 3.2GHz has been proved many times to be about equal to an AMD processor of 2.0GHz. AMD CPUs do more per clock cycle, AKA more per MHz, GHz, etc etc. This is one of the main reasons people think that Intel CPUs are so good, is because they go to higher clock speeds. This is not the case.

 

[ihosty]

slam dunk