Search Results

Search found 854 results on 35 pages for 'cores'.

Page 11/35 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • Looking to trade a 1U HP Proliant DL360 G5 in exchange for a small linux VPS

    - by user597875
    I have a 1U HP Proliant DL360 G5 that I have no place to rack and would like to trade it for a small linux VPS. If interested let me know... Here are the specs of the server: Model: Intel Xeon CPU 5150 @ 2.66GHz, 4MB L2 Cache Processor Speed: 2.7GHz Processor Sockets: 2 Processor Cores per Socket: 2 Logical Processors: 4 8GB of memory 4x72GB 10k SAS drives Manufacturer: HP Model: Proliant DL360 G5 BIOS Version: P58

    Read the article

  • How many per-core licenses do I need?

    - by GavinPayneUK
      With SQL Server 2012, your licensing requirements can chose to use or be required to use a per-core model depending on the edition you’re deploying. This is a change to previous editions which used a per-CPU socket model that made counting how many per-CPU licences you needed easier – cores and HyperThreading didn’t influence the CPU socket count.  Any complications which people did have typically came from running SQL Server in a virtualised environment, was a vCPU a socket or did licensing...(read more)

    Read the article

  • overheating and shutdown problems when adobe flash runs?

    - by hamid
    I'm a new user of UBUNTU and using a Dell latitude D630. When I browse to site that have some flash animation (mostly advertisements), the temperature of cores increase dramatically (I check with sensors, in the worse case it was 104C for one core and 93 for the other core) and if I don't close the website it will shutdown the laptop. Do you have any suggestion or solution for that? PS: as an example for crashing sites you can see "tabnak.ir", a news website with lots of ads.

    Read the article

  • 4.8M wasn't enough so we went for 5.055M tpmc with Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel r2 :-)

    - by wcoekaer
    We released a new set of benchmarks today. One is an updated tpc-c from a few months ago where we had just over 4.8M tpmc at $0.98 and we just updated it to go to 5.05M and $0.89. The other one is related to Java Middleware performance. You can find the press release here. Now, I don't want to talk about the actual relevance of the benchmark numbers, as I am not in the benchmark team. I want to talk about why these numbers and these efforts, unrelated to what they mean to your workload, matter to customers. The actual benchmark effort is a very big, long, expensive undertaking where many groups work together as a big virtual team. Having the virtual team be within a single company of course helps tremendously... We already start with a very big server setup with tons of storage, many disks, lots of ram, lots of cpu's, cores, threads, large database setups. Getting the whole setup going to start tuning, by itself, is no easy task, but then the real fun starts with tuning the system for optimal performance -and- stability. A benchmark is not just revving an engine at high rpm, it's actually hitting the circuit. The tests require long runs, require surviving availability tests, such as surviving crashes -and- recovery under load. In the TPC-C example, the x4800 system had 4TB ram, 160 threads (8 sockets, hyperthreaded, 10 cores/socket), tons of storage attached, tons of luns visible to the OS. flash storage, non flash storage... many things at high scale that all have to be perfectly synchronized. During this process, we find bugs, we fix bugs, we find performance issues, we fix performance issues, we find interesting potential features to investigate for the future, we start new development projects for future releases and all this goes back into the products. As more and more customers, for Oracle Linux, are running larger and larger, faster and faster, more mission critical, higher available databases..., these things are just absolutely critical. Unrelated to what anyone's specific opinion is about tpc-c or tpc-h or specjenterprise etc, there is a ton of effort that the customer benefits from. All this work makes Oracle Linux and/or Oracle Solaris better platforms. Whether it's faster, more stable, more scalable, more resilient. It helps. Another point that I always like to re-iterate around UEK and UEK2 : we have our kernel source git repository online. Complete changelog of the mainline kernel, and our changes, easy to pull, easy to dissect, easy to know what went in when, why and where. No need to go log into a website and manually click through pages to hopefully discover changes or patches. No need to untar 2 tar balls and run a diff.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Connections Fall 2011 - Demos

    - by Adam Machanic
    Today is the last day of the annual SQL Server Connections show in Vegas, and I've just completed my third and final talk. (Now off to find a frosty beverage or two.) This year I did three sessions: SQL302: Parallelism and Performance: Are You Getting Full Return on Your CPU Investment? Over the past five years, multi-core processors have made the jump from semi-obscure to commonplace in the data center. While servers with 16, 32, or even 64 cores were once an out-of-reach choice for all except the...(read more)

    Read the article

  • New SQL Server 2012 per core licensing – Thank you Microsoft

    - by jchang
    Many of us have probably seen the new SQL Server 2012 per core licensing, with Enterprise Edition at $6,874 per core super ceding the $27,495 per socket of SQL Server 2008 R2 (discounted to $19,188 for 4-way and $23,370 for 2-way in TPC benchmark reports) with Software Assurance at $6,874 per processor? Datacenter was $57,498 per processor, so the new per-core licensing puts 2012 EE on par with 2008R2 DC, at 8-cores per socket. This is a significant increase for EE licensing on the 2-way Xeon 5600...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 12.10 running slow

    - by andrew
    I pasted syslog and perhaps anyone can see trouble that might need attention. It is running too slow for what I would suspect. Opening apps and web pages just takes forever. http://paste.ubuntu.com/1303211/ System Specs: Oct 24 12:42:55 ubuntu kernel: [ 1.369735] powernow-k8: Found 1 AMD V140 Processor (1 cpu cores) (version 2.20.00) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Phenom_microprocessors#.22Champlain.22_.2845_nm.2C_Single-core.29_2

    Read the article

  • Queries barely over the Cost Threshold for Parallelism

    - by jchang
    I had discussed SQL Server parallelism in Oct 2010, with my thoughts on the best settings for: Cost Threshold for Parallelism (CTP) and Max Degrees of Parallelism (MAXDOP) in Parallelism Strategy and Comments . At the time, I had intended to follow up with detailed measurements. So now a mere 2 years later, here it is. The general thought was that CTP should be raised from the default value of 5, and MAXDOP should be changed from unrestricted, on modern systems with very many cores, and most especially...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Queries barely over the Cost Threshold for Parallelism

    - by jchang
    Previously I had discussed SQL Server parallelism, with my thoughts on the best settings for: Cost Threshold for Parallelism (CTP) and Max Degrees of Parallelism (MAXDOP) in Parallelism Strategy and Comments . At the time, I had intended to follow up with detailed measurements. So now a mere 2 years later, here it is. The general thought was that CTP should be raised from the default value of 5, and MAXDOP should be changed from unrestricted, on modern systems with very many cores, and most especially...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Kernel Log: Linux 2.6.34 goes into testing

    <b>The H Open:</b> "Improvements include graphics drivers for recent Radeon GPUs and for the graphics cores of some Intel processors that are only expected to be released early next year. Another new addition is the LogFS SSD file system."

    Read the article

  • Detecting Hyper-Threading state

    - by jchang
    To interpret performance counters and execution statistics correctly, it is necessary to know state of Hyper-Threading. In principle, at low overall CPU utilization, for non-parallel execution plans, it should not matter whether HT is enabled or not. Of course, DBA life is never that simple. The state of HT does matter at high over utilization and in parallel execution plans depending on the DOP. SQL Server does seem to try to allocate threads on distinct physical cores at intermediate DOP (DOP less...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Detecting Hyper-Threading state

    - by jchang
    To interpret performance counters and execution statistics correctly, it is necessary to know state of Hyper-Threading. In principle, at low overall CPU utilization, for non-parallel execution plans, it should not matter whether HT is enabled or not. Of course, DBA life is never that simple. The state of HT does matter at high over utilization and in parallel execution plans depending on the DOP. SQL Server does seem to try to allocate threads on distinct physical cores at intermediate DOP (DOP less...(read more)

    Read the article

  • 3d Studio Max and 2+CPUs - Core limit ?

    - by FreekOne
    Hi guys, I am scouting for parts to put in a new machine, and in the process, while looking at different benchmarks I stumbled upon this benchmark and it got me a bit worried. Quote form it: Noticably absent from this review is an old-time favorite, 3ds Max. I did attempt to run our custom 3ds Max benchmark on both the 2009 and 2010 versions of the software, but the application would simply not load on the Westmere box with hyper-threading enabled. Evidently Autodesk didn't plan far enough ahead to write their software for more than 16 threads. Once there is an update that addresses this issue, I will happily add 3ds Max back into the benchmarking mix. Since I was looking at dual hexa-core Xeons (x5650), that would put my future machine at 24 logical cores which (duh) is well over 16 cores and since I'm mostly building this for 3DS Max work, you can see how this would seriously spoil my plans. I tried looking for additional information on this potential issue, but the above article seems to be the only one who mentions it. Could anyone who has access to a 16 core machine or an in-depth knowledge about 3DS Max please confirm this ? Any help would be much appreciated !

    Read the article

  • How to improve Windows Server 2008 R2 to handle many connections?

    - by invisal
    It has been a few days so far that I am trying to figure how to solve this problem. First of all, I am running a website with an average daily page view of 350,000. Previously, all ads management (tracking click and impression that each ads has served) and content were served in a single server with the following spec: Server 1 OS: Windows 2008 R2 64-Bit CPU: Intel® Core™ i5 - 4 cores RAM: 8 GB Storage: 2 x 1 TB hard drives Bandwidth: 10 TB per month To improve our website speed, I decided to separate the ads management script to another dedicated server because we have more than 15 advertisers to 30 advertisers per each page. Server 2 OS: Windows 2008 R2 64-Bit CPU: Intel® Core™ i5 - 4 cores RAM: 4 GB Storage: 2 x 300 GB hard drives Bandwidth: 10 TB per month The Problem The problem is that Server 1 can handle both content and ads system. Now, that I take away the ads system and put it at Server 2. Server 2 can barely serve only ads system. Test First of all, I moved 75% of the ads to Server 2. And then, perform a ping to server: ping -t xxxxx. [I did the ping for 10 minutes and its following similar pattern as below] Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=290ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=289ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=320ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=286ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=286ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=348ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=284ms TTL=116 Then, I moved 100% of the ads to Server 2. Then, perform a ping to server again. [I did the ping for 10 minutes and its following similar pattern as below] Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=290ms TTL=116 Request timed out Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=320ms TTL=116 Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=286ms TTL=116 Request timed out Request timed out Reply from xxxxx bytes=32 time=284ms TTL=116 Attempts Increase MaxUserPort and TcpNumConnection Restart the server Increase IIS Max Instances and Instance MaxRequests Server Resource Only 10%-15% of the network connection is used Only 10%-15% of the CPU is used Only 25% of the memory is used

    Read the article

  • Why does cpuinfo report that my frequency is slower?

    - by Avery Chan
    My machine is running off of a AMD Sempron(tm) X2 190 Processor. According the marketing copy, it should be running at around 2.5 Ghz. Why is the cpu speed being reported as something lower? Spec description (in Chinese) $ cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 6 model name : AMD Sempron(tm) X2 190 Processor stepping : 3 microcode : 0x10000c8 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 apicid : 0 initial apicid : 0 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nopl nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 5022.89 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate processor : 1 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 16 model : 6 model name : AMD Sempron(tm) X2 190 Processor stepping : 3 microcode : 0x10000c8 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 512 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 1 cpu cores : 2 apicid : 1 initial apicid : 1 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 5 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nopl nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save bogomips : 5022.82 TLB size : 1024 4K pages clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate

    Read the article

  • Best CPUs for speeding up compiling times of C++ w/ DistGCC

    - by Jay
    I'm putting together a distributed build farm with DistGCC to speed up our teams compile times and just looking for thoughts on which processors to use in the hosts. Are we going to get a noticeable decrease in time using 8 cores vs. 4-hyperthreaded cores? Big difference in time between i7 and Xeon? etc, etc. Just need advice from people who've put together kick-a build clusters. We've got a majority of the normal things to speed up builds in place (pre-compiled headers, ccache, local gigabit connections between them, tons of ram, etc) so please just give advice on the best processor to use. And money is a factor, but anythings doable if the performance increase is noticeable. Thanks. Jay EDIT: Although any advice IS welcome, please refrain from "Do this first" posts as we're not planning on skimping on things like SSD, maxed out RAM, etc. My personal system is a iMac Quad-core i5 with 8GB of RAM. When I build our project locally, my processor floats around 99-100% a majority of the time, which makes me assume it is a bottleneck, even if you made everything else faster. My ram on the other hand doesn't even get close to maxing out. It's also worth noting that I did research this, however every discussion I could find was primarily for gaming machines, which is obviously a different beast in usage. These machines won't even have monitors or anything but integrated graphics since they have one purpose: Build freakin fast. (hopefully)

    Read the article

  • Best CPUs for speeding up compiling times of C++ w/ DistGCC

    - by Jay
    I'm putting together a distributed build farm with DistGCC to speed up our teams compile times and just looking for thoughts on which processors to use in the hosts. Are we going to get a noticeable decrease in time using 8 cores vs. 4-hyperthreaded cores? Big difference in time between i7 and Xeon? etc, etc. Just need advice from people who've put together kick-a build clusters. We've got a majority of the normal things to speed up builds in place (pre-compiled headers, ccache, local gigabit connections between them, tons of ram, etc) so please just give advice on the best processor to use. And money is a factor, but anythings doable if the performance increase is noticeable. Thanks. Jay EDIT: Although any advice IS welcome, please refrain from "Do this first" posts as we're not planning on skimping on things like SSD, maxed out RAM, etc. My personal system is a iMac Quad-core i5 with 8GB of RAM. When I build our project locally, my processor floats around 99-100% a majority of the time, which makes me assume it is a bottleneck, even if you made everything else faster. My ram on the other hand doesn't even get close to maxing out. It's also worth noting that I did research this, however every discussion I could find was primarily for gaming machines, which is obviously a different beast in usage. These machines won't even have monitors or anything but integrated graphics since they have one purpose: Build freakin fast. (hopefully)

    Read the article

  • Best CPUs for speeding up compiling times of C++ w/ DistGCC

    - by Jay
    I'm putting together a distributed build farm with DistGCC to speed up our teams compile times and just looking for thoughts on which processors to use in the hosts. Are we going to get a noticeable decrease in time using 8 cores vs. 4-hyperthreaded cores? Big difference in time between i7 and Xeon? etc, etc. Just need advice from people who've put together kick-a build clusters. We've got a majority of the normal things to speed up builds in place (pre-compiled headers, ccache, local gigabit connections between them, tons of ram, etc) so please just give advice on the best processor to use. And money is a factor, but anythings doable if the performance increase is noticeable. Thanks. Jay EDIT: Although any advice IS welcome, please refrain from "Do this first" posts as we're not planning on skimping on things like SSD, maxed out RAM, etc. My personal system is a iMac Quad-core i5 with 8GB of RAM. When I build our project locally, my processor floats around 99-100% a majority of the time, which makes me assume it is a bottleneck, even if you made everything else faster. My ram on the other hand doesn't even get close to maxing out. It's also worth noting that I did research this, however every discussion I could find was primarily for gaming machines, which is obviously a different beast in usage. These machines won't even have monitors or anything but integrated graphics since they have one purpose: Build freakin fast. (hopefully)

    Read the article

  • What does "cpuid level" means ? Asking just for curiosity

    - by ogzylz
    For example, I put just 2 core info of a 16 core machine. What does "cpuid level : 6" line means? If u can provide info about lines "bogomips : 5992.10" and "clflush size : 64" I will be appreciated ------------- processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 15 model : 6 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz stepping : 8 cpu MHz : 2992.689 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 4 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 6 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx lm constant_tsc pni monitor ds_cpl vmx cid cx16 xtpr lahf_lm bogomips : 5992.10 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 128 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: processor : 1 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 15 model : 6 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz stepping : 8 cpu MHz : 2992.689 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 1 siblings : 4 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 6 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx lm constant_tsc pni monitor ds_cpl vmx cid cx16 xtpr lahf_lm bogomips : 5985.23 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 128 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management:

    Read the article

  • Can anyone explain these differences between two similar i7 processors? [closed]

    - by Brian Frost
    I have two systems I've just built. They both have i7 processors and Asus P8Z77 motherboards. When I run a simple processor loop benchmark that I wrote in Delphi some time back I get one machine showing nealry twice as fast as the other. I then used CPU-Z to dump me the details of the hardware and I see that the fast machine shows: Processor 1 ID = 0 Number of cores 4 (max 8) Number of threads 8 (max 16) Name Intel Core i7 2700K Codename Sandy Bridge Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2700K CPU @ 3.50GHz Package (platform ID) Socket 1155 LGA (0x1) CPUID 6.A.7 Extended CPUID 6.2A Core Stepping D2 Technology 32 nm TDP Limit 95 Watts Core Speed 3610.7 MHz Multiplier x FSB 36.0 x 100.3 MHz Stock frequency 3500 MHz the slow machine shows: Processor 1 ID = 0 Number of cores 4 (max 8) Number of threads 8 (max 16) Name Intel Core i7 2600K Codename Sandy Bridge Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz Package (platform ID) Socket 1155 LGA (0x1) CPUID 6.A.7 Extended CPUID 6.2A Core Stepping D2 Technology 32 nm TDP Limit 95 Watts Core Speed 1648.2 MHz Multiplier x FSB 16.0 x 103.0 MHz Stock frequency 3400 MHz i.e the slow machine has a 2600k to the fast machine 2700k. The very different "Multiplier x FSB" must be significant but I dont understand how two processors with a very 'similar' number can be so different. To get the machines the same must I copy the processors or is there some clever setting that I can change? Thanks for any help. Brian.

    Read the article

  • High load average due to high system cpu load (%sys)

    - by Nick
    We have server with high traffic website. Recently we moved from 2 x 4 core server (8 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 5.x, to 2 x 4 core server (16 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 6.3 Server running nginx as a proxy, mysql server and sphinx-search. Traffic is high, but mysql and sphinx-search databases are relatively small, and usually everything works blazing fast. Today server experienced load average of 100++. Looking at top and sar, we noticed that (%sys) is very high - 50 to 70%. Disk utilization was less 1%. We tried to reboot, but problem existed after the reboot. At any moment server had at least 3-4 GB free RAM. Only message shown by dmesg was "possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies.". Here is snippet of sar 11:00:01 CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 11:10:01 all 21.60 0.00 66.38 0.03 0.00 11.99 We know that this is traffic issue, but we do not know how to proceed future and where to check for solution. Is there a way we can find where exactly those "66.38%" are used. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • HyperV - low CPU usage

    - by Klark
    I am very new to HyperV and virtual machine philosophy in general, so please expect more or less nooby questions :) I have a server that is only used as a host for virtual machines. OS is windows server 2008 R2 and it is running on 16 CPU and 48 GBs of RAM. On aforementioned server there are 8 VMs, each having 4 CPUs and 4 GBs of RAM. On those VMs we are running some CPU intensive tasks. Each machine has nearly 100% cpu usage. After I noticed slow performance I went to the host machine and started playing with process explorer. It turned out that cpu usage is very low. Also I/O is very low, and of course, memory consumption is high, which is expected. Of course, I don't expect that those 4 virtual cores dedicated to a VM work as fast as real, hardware 4 cores, but still I expected a higher consumption of real hardware. Is this sort of behaviour normal? I see that the most of CPU usage on host machine are marked as interrupts (which I guess is normal) and all those interrupts are passed to only one core (which is strange). Are there out of box optimization that I could perform to finally use all that processing power that is under the hood. My knowledge of virtualization technology is near to embarrassing, so I would be grateful for any links that could enlightened me :) Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >