Our organisation we have 25 computers and we are trying to setup Windows Server 2003. We are planning to configure

  • Active Directory
  • NAT
  • DNS server
  • Visual Studio Team Foundation Server
  • Subversion (SVN)
  • Trac (Bug tracking tool)
  • FTP server

And our Hardware configuration is

  • AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual (Core processor 5600+, 2.60 GHz)
  • Asus motherboard (M2N series)
  • Transcend 4 GB RAM (800 MHz)
  • 500 GB Hard Disk (RAID enabled)

But my colleague is advising me AMD won't suite for servers platforms, and use Intel environment. Also they telling we can't install all the services to one server.
I got confusion what to do?... Is really can`t install above services to AMD computer?

Thanks...

link|improve this question
feedback

migrated from stackoverflow.com Mar 22 '10 at 1:41

This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

2 Answers

brotharewt is correct, it is best to split into 2 servers, domain services and applications if money permits.

As for AMD over Intel, if the CPU's are comparable there is no real difference on Servers.

Workstations and the apps that run on them can make a difference, but, not servers.

HTH

link|improve this answer
+1 separating servers also reduces the damage caused by an outage to one of them... – davidsleeps Mar 22 '10 at 2:20
feedback

Although you can install of your apps on the same server and have it work (have it work meaning not explode on install). A better course of action would be to keep your active directory and other server functions (DNS, DHCP etc) separate from your applications. Get yourself another server and have a DC for server functions and an application server. As for AMD vs. Intel, its a matter of preference.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown