• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

New build mainly for Virtual Machines

paul_31

paul_31

paul_31

Associate
Joined
16 Aug 2003
Posts
482
Location
Worcestershire
Hi Guys,

I haven't really kept up to date with PC/CPU tech over the last year or 2 so have been reading over a lot of posts and reviews to try and pick things up.

I am planning a new build in a month or so which will mainly be used for running VM's. I want to run Linux and Windows VM's but more importantly my primary use will be for running GNS3/Dynamips for multiple virtual Cisco router labs (I'm a Cisco engineer and studying for CCNP at the mo)

So....when it comes to my build, I don't have a huge budget, ~£100 for CPU maybe up to £150 max. When running VM's will I see a big performance gain from running a quad-core over dual-core? Or will it depend on o/s and virtualization software as to if it makes use of the cores?

Are there major difference's between Intel Core 2 or AMD Phenom II? I have had both AMD and Intel in the past so happy to go with whatever gives the best "bang for buck"!

Thanks in advance :)

Paul.
 
you definitely want to look at getting in as many cores as possible, so tri or quad core would be perfect. Also, as you are running VMs, you want to look into processors that support virtualisation technology, either AMD-V or VT-x.

what is the maximum you are prepared to spend on the build, and, are you recycling any parts from an existing one? (e.g, monitors, keyboards, hard disks)
 
i jsut finished bsci and iscw ;D

i suggest you to save up and get i7, they are really great for vmware/gns
quads are more for gaming
 
Quad-core and a heap of memory if you're intending to run multiple VM's. A used Q6600 would be great.


Which virtualisation software will you be running?
 
I would get a used Q6600 for about £90 of Member's Market and 8GB ram which is only about £70 nowadays. I feel 4GB isn't quite enough for me when running 2 768MB Linux folding VMs, and using Win7 as a main OS. So if you're wanting to run Vista/Win 7 and such in VMs then each VM should be given a couple of GB ram.
 
a lot depends on your VM Software.
Officially, VMWare specifiys that 12 light VMs can be used per core.
Add to that memory bubbling and you wont need as much memory as you might think either....
 
Yes, however I use VMware Sever and as such it can only make use of two cores per VM, however VMware Workstation can make use of four.
 
Thanks for the replies guys, i was thinking of going quad-core and just throwing in as much memory as I can afford (6 or 8GB probably)

Would I see any difference between a Q6700 such as -
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 LGA775 "Kentsfield" 2.66GHz (1066FSB)

and a Phenom such as -
AMD Phenom II X4 Quad Core 940 Black Edition 3.0GHz (Socket AM2+)

both are around the same price but would either be more suitable for the job or is there not much in it?

Software wise I mainly use VirtualBox at home but do use VMWare at work, haven't decided what to use on the new build...will either of these make better use of the quad-core for running VM's?

Thanks.
 
Any of the Quads listed will do you proud.

Just be careful if you spy a cheap Intel Q8xxx as they don't support VT-x.

I went for the Phenom II but that's just me. You're unlikely to notice any performance difference.
 
Go for a quad core CPU with lots of cache - Phenoms have better on chip cache and memory controller IMHO, Intel basically copied AMDs concept of how to set up a memory controller for the i7.

Unless you will be running dozens of VMs concurrently, an i7 is a waste of money for this purpose IMHO.

Also, if this machine is to be used for nothing but VMs, use VMWare ESXi, the Layer1 hypervisor - it's much, much better with none of these silly restrictions on CPU cores etc.

I run four VMs [two ubuntu, two windows] on a P4D with 4GB of RAM on ESXi 3.5 - works fine. It also doesn't wet itself when the underlying OS [ie, VMware Server on Windows] demands to restart without warning, crashes, etc.

If you seriously want to run VMs long term, don't use something that runs within another OS - asking for trouble.
 
Thanks StevenRaith. I know of ESXi but haven't personally used it before. I may give this a try. I was planning on having a dual-monitor set up and having a different VM machine on each monitor for normal use.

I'm not sure if I would be able to run Dynamips directly on ESXi or whether this would have to be ran inside one of the VM's. I've only ever played about with it a couple of times before running inside an Ubuntu VM....I'll have to have a read up on it!

Thanks.
 
paul_31 said:
I'm not sure if I would be able to run Dynamips directly on ESXi or whether this would have to be ran inside one of the VM's. I've only ever played about with it a couple of times before running inside an Ubuntu VM....I'll have to have a read up on it!

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I would doubt it, ESXi is very stipped down. You would also need another PC to use as a terminal if you used ESXi.

I'd go for VMWare server if you want free and compatible with other VMware products. If compatibility isn't an issue have a look at VirtualBox. It's got multiple snap shot levels and supports multiple network cards. Something VMserver doesn't do.
 
I use virtualbox for messing around with different OS' and teaching myself things and I'd recommend a quad. As for the Q6600 or a 940, I'd go with the 940 myself as it's got a slightly faster base clock for about the same price.

RAM wise, at least 4GB. I'd go for 8GB as it's fairly cheap and you can never have too much RAM :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom