0

Currently have a 2 socket server with a single xeon e5-2407 @2.2Ghz running SQL Server 2012. There are no performance issues at the moment but wondering for the future if it would be better to upgrade the existing CPU (higher clock speed, more cache, etc) or to add an additional matching CPU into the second slot.

Appreciate your advise on pros and cons of each and things I should be aware of.

Thank you!

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    If licensing cost isn't an issue, then we can't judge cores by their price either (as licensing cost per core > your cpu cost). In which case it's kind of a weird discussion... If price isn't an issue simply replace the cpu with the most expensive cpu you can buy x2 and populate both sockets...
    – Reaces
    Dec 18, 2014 at 12:46

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

Within your question: Licensing says upgrade CPU because most likely you are licensed per socket or core. So adding a second processor will cost.

Improve this answer
3
  • You're actually going to be hard pressed finding a cpu to replace the E5 series quad cores that is better with 4 cores. At the least you'll be looking at 6 cores. Licensing wise you're incurring a pretty significant hit either way. I'd definately opt for a second quad core over replacing it with a six-core processor.
    – Reaces
    Dec 18, 2014 at 12:34
  • Thank you both but I'd like to keep licensing considerations out of this and focus primarily on performance.
    – Fahd
    Dec 18, 2014 at 12:39
  • @Fahd You can't really keep licensing out of it. Your core licensing affects your memory usage as well as your core usage. And should be your primary concern whenever looking at upgrading your CPU.
    – Reaces
    Dec 18, 2014 at 12:40
0

Lot of RAM is more preferrable as far as you can cache DB indexes into the memory.

Improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .