Dual Quad Core vs 4 Dual Core Performance

We like the idea of Dual Quad Cores 'cos now you can license SQL for 2
physical sockets as opposed to 4 if we were going with 4 dual core chips. Am
I right there from a licnensing perspective ?
Also what other differences should I be aware of especially from a
performance standpoint ? I would think they should both be similar..
ThanksRegarding to the licensing, you pay for license for each physical CPU
socket. You don't need separate licenses for each core.
--
Ekrem Önsoy
"Hassan" <hassan@.test.com> wrote in message
news:uIGZQDrRIHA.3676@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> We like the idea of Dual Quad Cores 'cos now you can license SQL for 2
> physical sockets as opposed to 4 if we were going with 4 dual core chips.
> Am I right there from a licnensing perspective ?
> Also what other differences should I be aware of especially from a
> performance standpoint ? I would think they should both be similar..
> Thanks
>
>|||Dear Hassan,
Your reasoning appears to be correct. You want to cram as many cores/cpu
power per socket if you are going with a per processor based licensing
scheme. A quad core or better CPU is what you would want to fully exploit
SQL Server licensing!
Regards,
James Simpson
Straightway Technologies Inc.|||At the high-end of the performance spectrum you should get better
performance (especially for large-data-volume queries) with a quad dual core
arrangement. This does assume that you have sufficiently capable I/O
subsystem bolted up to the server.
--
Kevin G. Boles
TheSQLGuru
Indicium Resources, Inc.
kgboles a earthlink dt net
"Hassan" <hassan@.test.com> wrote in message
news:uIGZQDrRIHA.3676@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> We like the idea of Dual Quad Cores 'cos now you can license SQL for 2
> physical sockets as opposed to 4 if we were going with 4 dual core chips.
> Am I right there from a licnensing perspective ?
> Also what other differences should I be aware of especially from a
> performance standpoint ? I would think they should both be similar..
> Thanks
>
>|||If you are saying that four dual-core sockets would give you better
performance than two quad-core sockets, I doubt it. I understand your
reasoning. But the technology progres is such that you generally get better
overall system configurations with newer processors. In other words, you may
find quad-core-socket servers come with better chipsets and PCI-E slots, and
so on.
Linchi
"TheSQLGuru" wrote:
> At the high-end of the performance spectrum you should get better
> performance (especially for large-data-volume queries) with a quad dual core
> arrangement. This does assume that you have sufficiently capable I/O
> subsystem bolted up to the server.
> --
> Kevin G. Boles
> TheSQLGuru
> Indicium Resources, Inc.
> kgboles a earthlink dt net
>
> "Hassan" <hassan@.test.com> wrote in message
> news:uIGZQDrRIHA.3676@.TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > We like the idea of Dual Quad Cores 'cos now you can license SQL for 2
> > physical sockets as opposed to 4 if we were going with 4 dual core chips.
> > Am I right there from a licnensing perspective ?
> >
> > Also what other differences should I be aware of especially from a
> > performance standpoint ? I would think they should both be similar..
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
>
>