# Using a server as a gaming rig?



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 20, 2011)

Just a quick question TPU. My friend from college got his hands on a server from a company that was going out of business. As far as he knows, it has an intel quad core processor and four gigabytes of RAM. Is there any physically/logical limitations that would stop me from using it as a gaming rig before I think of buying it off of him? 

Cheers


----------



## qubit (Sep 20, 2011)

It could technically work, but you would need a decent graphics card in there. You may need a sound card too.

Also, not all software installs on a server OS, because they impose licensing restrictions.

Please give us the make and model of this server, so we have a better idea of its spec and what it's generally capable of.


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 20, 2011)

Ahhh ok. I see. I don't have that information but i just wanted to know if it was possible. I have a spare graphics card and sound card somewhere so i should be ok. Thanks


----------



## qubit (Sep 20, 2011)

Be sure that the PSU is capable enough too. Those servers have different design targets from a regular PC.

If you can get us those details (no rush) and your graphics card model, the community here will be happy to weigh in with lots of useful advice and prevent any potential pitfalls.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Do you know what server model is it? I have windows 7 on my DL380 G5 and everything runs with no problems at all.
The problem is there probably are no power connectors for a graphic card (PCI-E power connectors...), I had to solder some wires directly to the PSU to get mine working.

EDIT: the problem could also be that there is no x16 PCI-E slot (Physical).


----------



## micropage7 (Sep 20, 2011)

wow server?
i remember couples years ago when many boards using double socket to push the performance


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Sep 20, 2011)

Get the details of this "server". Post them up, so we can all make more informed comments.

I have a PC that is based on an ASUS mainboard designed for servers and/or workstations with 2x s771.  These things are very nice, and very solid, but they are specced differently. E.g.  more PCI sockets, less PCIe sockets. Expensive and slower RAM but with error correction and hot swap, far too many SATA and RAID connections and no sound card!

I wouldnt recommend BUILDING a gaming PC using a server platform. But if you HAVE ALREADY GOT a server platform, it should run games fine, so long as you can get a decent GPU in there.

WATCH OUT for software and hardware driver compatibility.  Running Windows 2K0 or 2K3 is one thing. Finding drivers to run W7 is something else. W2K3 will max at DX9.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 20, 2011)

In my experience, the only server I saw was a HP Proliant ML350 g1, only had PCIe x8 besides PCI-x, was very noisy, bulky, had a ATI Rage graphics (lol), took ages to boot, and I don't know if Windows 7 is compatible (I didn't tried, though).

but was very powerful with 2x Xeon CPUs.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> WATCH OUT for software and hardware driver compatibility.  Running Windows 2K0 or 2K3 is one thing. Finding drivers to run W7 is something else. W2K3 will max at DX9.



I don't think it would be a problem, since he said it has a quad core CPU (which means it isn't that old) so Windows 7 should work there with no problems. Drivers for Windows Server 2008 R2 usually work with win 7.


The only serious problem there could be is that it doesn't have a PCI-E x16 slot and if it's a 2U size it probably won't have any cables for powering the card (PSU's are usually directly connected to the MB). 

Also, I doubt you will like the noise these things produce.


----------



## Red_Machine (Sep 20, 2011)

This reminds me of those guys on eBay who sell retired servers as "ultimate gaming rigs" and all they have is dual Pentium 4-class Xeons, a load of slow RAM and a shitty Quadro card.

Make sure you know what you're getting before you buy it.  You could be getting a lemon.


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 20, 2011)

Thanks for all the replies guys! I will give you the details tomorrow. I'm going over to see it. He said he would give me it for £75 (which is an absolute steal imo) Thanks again!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 20, 2011)

Heh, it could be a Via QuadCore.


----------



## qubit (Sep 20, 2011)

ObSo-1337 said:


> Thanks for all the replies guys! I will give you the details tomorrow. I'm going over to see it. He said he would give me it for £75 (which is an absolute steal imo) Thanks again!



I tell you what, for £75 it might be worth it even if it's no good for gaming. It might have a decent CPU and you might be able to use it for other tasks.

Definitely get us that make and model number!


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Sep 20, 2011)

I say we wants piccies, yes we does.


----------



## Frick (Sep 20, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Heh, it could be a Via QuadCore.



That would be pretty awesome actually.


----------



## mrw1986 (Sep 20, 2011)

I'm in the same boat as the op...I have a chance to get a Dell server that's a dual quadcore Xeon, 16gb RAM, the whole nine yards. I was thinking about just putting my GTX280 in it and rockin' it for games. My only concern is I don't think I'll be able to OC the CPU's (they run at like 2.6ghz or something) because of the motherboard. 

I wouldn't have to pay anything for the server because my dad would be giving it to me. Long story short he bought a couple pallets worth of Dell computer stuff from a business and almost all of it was brand new with the exception of a few of the workstations. He already made his money back selling a few of the things such as a dual quadcore Xeon, 16gb RAM, workstation and a couple laptops.

Would this server be more viable than my current rig in my specs for gaming? Or would the low clock speed compared to what I run slow me down. I know the dual chips won't mean crap in games, but I also encode movies and what not.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 20, 2011)

Specs and pictures of the inside!


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

mrw1986 said:


> I'm in the same boat as the op...I have a chance to get a Dell server that's a dual quadcore Xeon, 16gb RAM, the whole nine yards. I was thinking about just putting my GTX280 in it and rockin' it for games. My only concern is I don't think I'll be able to OC the CPU's (they run at like 2.6ghz or something) because of the motherboard.
> 
> I wouldn't have to pay anything for the server because my dad would be giving it to me. Long story short he bought a couple pallets worth of Dell computer stuff from a business and almost all of it was brand new with the exception of a few of the workstations. He already made his money back selling a few of the things such as a dual quadcore Xeon, 16gb RAM, workstation and a couple laptops.
> 
> Would this server be more viable than my current rig in my specs for gaming? Or would the low clock speed compared to what I run slow me down. I know the dual chips won't mean crap in games, but I also encode movies and what not.



OC is out of the question when talking about servers. It wouldn't be better in terms of gaming (because of the CPU freq. and slower RAM) but it would be a beast for rendering and such where you can use all of the 8 cores (or if you use a lot of VM's).
Only way to get higher clocked CPU is by getting a higher clocked CPU which costs a lot.

Noise is also an issue, these things are really loud and produce a lot of heat.

Also if the server is 2U of height the PSU is probably hot-plug and there are no cables to power your card, you can get away with some sort of mod (soldering wires directly to the PSU like I did with mine).

If you can get it for free, well get it  

Also, what model is it?


----------



## mrw1986 (Sep 20, 2011)

repman244 said:


> OC is out of the question when talking about servers. It wouldn't be better in terms of gaming (because of the CPU freq. and slower RAM) but it would be a beast for rendering and such where you can use all of the 8 cores (or if you use a lot of VM's).
> Only way to get higher clocked CPU is by getting a higher clocked CPU which costs a lot.
> 
> Noise is also an issue, these things are really loud and produce a lot of heat.
> ...



I don't remember the specifics of it, but I know it's actually not a loud or hot server. It's actually currently running right now at one of my dad's clients. He's using it in the meantime as a PC because his main one died. It sit's in a case that's a little smaller than a full tower but bigger than a mid tower.

EDIT: Looking through my email I found it. It's a Dell Poweredge 1900.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

mrw1986 said:


> I don't remember the specifics of it, but I know it's actually not a loud or hot server. It's actually currently running right now at one of my dad's clients. He's using it in the meantime as a PC because his main one died. It sit's in a case that's a little smaller than a full tower but bigger than a mid tower.



Then it's a 4U case (explains why it's a little cooler ), then I think the cabling shouldn't be a problem. The one I'm using is 2U with 12 fans which explains the noise


----------



## Sinzia (Sep 20, 2011)

I do love the look of most 4u rackmount cases, almost as good as the pedestal units.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 20, 2011)

I have a 2U server on my desk right now, It is slow (E5200 Dual Core, 4GB DDR2) and not really good for gaming. It does have a PCIex x16 2.0 slot but Would have to be a low profile card.


----------



## mrw1986 (Sep 20, 2011)

mrw1986 said:


> I don't remember the specifics of it, but I know it's actually not a loud or hot server. It's actually currently running right now at one of my dad's clients. He's using it in the meantime as a PC because his main one died. It sit's in a case that's a little smaller than a full tower but bigger than a mid tower.
> 
> EDIT: Looking through my email I found it. It's a Dell Poweredge 1900.



I couldn't find the exact Dell order number from it, but it's pretty much the highest end configuration of the unit. We sold one of the workstations with comparable specs for about $1600 about 6 months ago. They even have the nice RAID cards in them (I can't remember if they have perc5/e or perc5/i in them).


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

I found this picture online, does it look anything close to it in the inside?

If the MB is the same it has 2xPCI-X and 4xPCI-e (x8) and a special slot for the RAID controller (I think). If there isn't any other configuration of the slots than I guess there isn't much chance you will get a graphics card to work there.
The only option which doesn't always work is to cut the PCI-e slot to fit a x16 card in there. But it may not work.
I tried that with my ML350G4 it wouldn't even post.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 20, 2011)

ObSo-1337 said:


> Ahhh ok. I see. I don't have that information but i just wanted to know if it was possible. I have a spare graphics card and sound card somewhere so i should be ok. Thanks



it will work, but odds are slower than a gaming PC.


people seem to think servers are godly fast uber machines, but truth is they're slower than gaming systems - they're just designed for 24/7 stability, over speed.


you could also run into problems with slots, it may not have PCI/PCI-E, and could be PCI-X and so on.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 20, 2011)

ObSo-1337 said:


> Thanks for all the replies guys! I will give you the details tomorrow. I'm going over to see it. He said he would give me it for £75 (which is an absolute steal imo) Thanks again!



If it has a PCIe x16 slot, then you are fine 




Mussels said:


> people seem to think servers are godly fast uber machines, but truth is they're slower than gaming systems - they're just designed for 24/7 stability, over speed.
> .



Nope I was said the Registered/buffered RAM is slower than normal one, and the Boot times are also slow, but the multiple CPU and hard disks SCSI/SAS arrays are normally very fast.

Servers are often intended to process large quantities of data so must be very fast


----------



## mrw1986 (Sep 20, 2011)

repman244 said:


> http://filedb.experts-exchange.com/incoming/2008/12_w52/t89639/dell-pe-1900.jpg
> 
> I found this picture online, does it look anything close to it in the inside?
> 
> ...



Hmm, I don't even recall what it looks like, haha!


----------



## Mussels (Sep 20, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Nope I was said the Registered/buffered RAM is slower than normal one, and the Boot times are also slow, but the multiple CPU and hard disks SCSI/SAS arrays are normally very fast.
> 
> Servers are often intended to process large quantities of data so must be very fast



servers are designed to multitask fast. not game fast. it can have four quad core CPU's, and it dont mean squat because the single threaded performance is what matters most with gaming.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> servers are designed to multitask fast. not game fast. it can have four quad core CPU's, and it dont mean squat because the single threaded performance is what matters most with gaming.



Don't games actually use multithread, multicore or multicpu? (besides GPU obviously)


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> servers are designed to multitask fast. not game fast. it can have four quad core CPU's, and it dont mean squat because the single threaded performance is what matters most with gaming.



And don't forget about slower RAM (Loose timings lower frequency and it's ECC which impacts the speed).



Derek12 said:


> Don't games actually use multithread, multicore or multicpu?



They do but the problem is that server CPU's have lower frequency, slower RAM.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 20, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Don't games actually use multithread, multicore or multicpu? (besides GPU obviously)



you can run multiple tasks, but you cant split one task over multiple cores. so for example if the AI is one thread and it needs more CPU power, more cores wont help you. you'll still lag.


servers are always about more cores, more threads, more ram, more drives - so they can do more things at one time, not do one thing faster.


----------



## Frick (Sep 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> servers are designed to multitask fast. not game fast. it can have four quad core CPU's, and it dont mean squat because the single threaded performance is what matters most with gaming.



But this has been improved a lot in recent years. It's not perfect, but it has come a long way.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 20, 2011)

Frick said:


> But this has been improved a lot in recent years. It's not perfect, but it has come a long way.



it hasnt improved at all, its how the tech works. games still mostly care about your single threaded performance above all else - yes, they now often benefit from having more cores, but a quad core at 4GHz is better than a 6 core at 3GHz, despite the 6 having better overall performance.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 20, 2011)

repman244 said:


> They do but the problem is that server CPU's have lower frequency, slower RAM.



Yeah that's what I commented, they have ECC or registered/buffered modules but I think they can run in quad channel? (I am not sure  )


Mussels said:


> you can run multiple tasks, but you cant split one task over multiple cores. so for example if the AI is one thread and it needs more CPU power, more cores wont help you. you'll still lag.
> 
> 
> servers are always about more cores, more threads, more ram, more drives - so they can do more things at one time, not do one thing faster.



But aren't Xeon more powerful (per thread) than a consumer one? I thought they were  (I am not very familiar with servers anyway)


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Yeah that's what I commented, they have ECC or registered/buffered modules but I think they can run in quad channel? (I am not sure  )
> 
> 
> But aren't Xeon more powerful (per thread) than a consumer one? I thought they were



The channels depend on the CPU (or NB on older platforms), ECC is there to prevent errors that may occur, the buffered RAM isn't in use anymore AFAIK, it was used on DDR2 RAM to increase the density and reliability but it ran really hot and used more power (we are talking about temperatures of 80C here).

Xeons are the same as the desktop parts in terms of per clock performance, the only thing that's different is the lower power consumption (lower voltage), ability to use ECC RAM and such, ability to use 2 CPU's.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 20, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> But aren't Xeon more powerful (per thread) than a consumer one? I thought they were  (I am not very familiar with servers anyway)



same performance per clock, and almost always clocked lower. its all about multiple cores on mutiple CPU's for the multi tasking, as i keep saying.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 20, 2011)

repman244 said:


> The channels depend on the CPU (or NB on older platforms), ECC is there to prevent errors that may occur, the buffered RAM isn't in use anymore AFAIK, it was used on DDR2 RAM to increase the density and reliability but it ran really hot and used more power (we are talking about temperatures of 80C here).
> 
> Xeons are the same as the desktop parts in terms of per clock performance, the only thing that's different is the lower power consumption (lower voltage), ability to use ECC RAM and such, ability to use 2 CPU's.





Mussels said:


> same performance per clock, and almost always clocked lower. its all about multiple cores on mutiple CPU's for the multi tasking, as i keep saying.





Many thanks for the clarification, about the buffered ram, I worked not long ago on a brand new server which had DDR2 buffered RAM (I can't remember the model, but I am sure the RAM was buffered, because normal or ECC RAM of the same technology (DDR2)  didn't fit the slot)


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Many thanks for the clarification, about the buffered ram, I worked not long ago on a brand new server which had DDR2 buffered RAM (I can't remember the model, but I am sure the RAM was buffered, because normal or ECC RAM of the same technology (DDR2)  didn't fit the slot)



It could be that it was DDR3 RAM, I don't think that Fully Buffered DDR2 and ECC DDR2 (unbuffered) have a different layout. 
This could give you a better idea of the registered (buffered) RAM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_memory

EDIT. you are right it does have a different layout.


----------



## de.das.dude (Sep 20, 2011)

someone here has a quad opteron server as gaming rig as i recall.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Sep 20, 2011)

a modern server would simply need a gpu upgrade to be able to game, the psu's will easily handle mid-level gpu's without issue and have plenty of cpu performance. (very few cpu demanding games don't take advantage of multi cores)

there's just a couple issues

1. can you really think of no use for a personal server?
2. compared to a 500$ gaming machine the performance will be similar, but the gaming machine will use less power, be quieter, and run cooler
3. if it's an older server say 771 based, that 500$ gaming rig would kick its ass. 
4. seriously there's all kinds of things you can do with a personal server


so it's money well spent, but really you can make it worth so much more by using it as a server rather than a gaming rig.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Sep 20, 2011)

Just to correct a few comments I read here:

1./ Some servers and their CPUs CAN be overclocked.  BIOSes generally dont have this option, but sometimes they can be softmodded, so they boot at clock and then you overclock using software utility.

2./ It is also possible to HARDWARE overclock some server CPUs. Look into BSEL mod. I did this to get two s771 Xeon 2.5Ghz up to 3.0Ghz.

3./ Multi-core servers will rape a gaming rig at map loads and also (sometimes) have smoother framerates albeit possibly slightly lower.  Map and texture loads involve loading off disk and/or decompressing zipped data and textures. Server architecture is good at this.

4./ I have found that memory bandwidth is not going to affect your gameplay. GPU then CPU then total RAM then HDD access speeds are the first four bottlenecks to worry about.

5./ Some server CPUs have monstrous cache which negates any performance loss on memory bandwidth, and might even take a "win"

6./ There is a strange tingly warm feeling you get running a server/workstation platform as a gaming rig. It's worth doing for fun even if you only get "95%" of the max framerate compared to a gaming rig.

7./ Er, don't go about spending more money than you need to! Stay efficient with your wallet


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 20, 2011)

As long as it doesn't have ECC memory (performance penalty), a relatively high clockspeed (>2 GHz), at least one PCI Express x16 slot (for a graphics card if it doesn't have one already), and either a spare PCI/PCIe x1 slot for an audio card or audio integrated it should work fine for gaming.

Oh, verify it works before buying.  It might be DOA which is why they're selling it for cheap.  If it is using a server socket, it will cost $100s of dollars to make operational again.


----------



## bpgt64 (Sep 20, 2011)

I would be concerned about sound, most server sound like freight trains.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Sep 20, 2011)

Okay, so games can't be split between processors, right? So if you put a good enough GPU in there you could play 2 games of BBC2 at the same time? Easy way to level up ;3


----------



## LordJummy (Sep 20, 2011)

Kevinheraiz said:


> Okay, so games can't be split between processors, right? So if you put a good enough GPU in there you could play 2 games of BBC2 at the same time? Easy way to level up ;3



Your thought process is highly illogical.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Sep 20, 2011)

Could the two procs run independent? or would it just put more stress on the first proc? I've never even touched a server so I don't know much. It seems kinda awesome though..


----------



## ShiBDiB (Sep 20, 2011)

This thread is a shitshow.. the original poster said he'd get us info and now a mod and a user derailed this with a multithreading arguement


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Sep 20, 2011)

Sorry


----------



## m4gicfour (Sep 21, 2011)

ShiBDiB said:


> This thread is a shitshow.. the original poster said he'd get us info and now a mod and a user derailed this with a multithreading arguement



Welcome to TPU. I see you've met Mussels 

</sarcasm>

Ontopic, If you don't want that $75 server, I'll take it... probably.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 21, 2011)

ShiBDiB said:


> This thread is a shitshow.. the original poster said he'd get us info and now a mod and a user derailed this with a multithreading arguement



First of all, isn't off topic, so don't claim falsehoods as "derailed" or "shitshow".

Second. It's interesting to know. because if servers are slower than desktop counterparts, they may not be used for gaming even if has dual processor.

fourth, he asked if a server has gaming computer is possible with a server because of logical or physical limitations. server RAM being slower and slow processing for thread as Mussels stated are limitations.

The arguing wasn't only about threading but also from RAM at the end with another user. Which in servers is slower.

and you precisely YOU did want you said, derailed the thread with your attack.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 21, 2011)

Kevinheraiz said:


> Could the two procs run independent? or would it just put more stress on the first proc? I've never even touched a server so I don't know much. It seems kinda awesome though..



AFAIK they can't, if you have 2 quad core CPU's windows sees them as 8 cores.

In fact running 2 x quad core vs a single 8 core (assuming they have the same clock, performance per clock) is a bit slower (in some cases), but that is minimal.

The whole purpose of 2P 4P systems is to pack as many CPU's/(cores) in a small space as possible.



ShiBDiB said:


> This thread is a shitshow.. the original poster said he'd get us info and now a mod and a user derailed this with a multithreading arguement



This thread is informative for those who don't know a lot about servers, I don't see how giving information/help to someone is a shitshow. And we are still talking about servers so it's not derailed.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 21, 2011)

You should be able to run the system with only one processor installed.  It'll have half the computing power though and no redundancy.  The primary reason why there's two in the first place is so that if one fails, the system will keep going.  Secondary is performance.  If performance is your only objective, it is always cheaper to have two one-way computers than a single two-way computer.


----------



## segalaw19800 (Sep 21, 2011)

*from an old thread*

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115212 
Computer Parts, PC Components, Laptop Computers, L...


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Sep 21, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> You should be able to run the system with only one processor installed.  It'll have half the computing power though and no redundancy.  The primary reason why there's two in the first place is so that if one fails, the system will keep going.  Secondary is performance.  If performance is your only objective, it is always cheaper to have two one-way computers than a single two-way computer.



Where did you gain that wisdom?


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 21, 2011)

52 replies ahah! I've learned a lot about servers in the last ten minutes of reading through these posts so I thank all of you. I am going to see the server today at 1pm so I'll try post some specs and pictures of what the servers guts are like


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 21, 2011)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Where did you gain that wisdom?


Which part?  Most of it is experience and observation.


----------



## Frick (Sep 21, 2011)

Mussels said:


> it hasnt improved at all, its how the tech works. games still mostly care about your single threaded performance above all else - yes, they now often benefit from having more cores, but a quad core at 4GHz is better than a 6 core at 3GHz, despite the 6 having better overall performance.



Indeed it's not perfect, but you can't be serious about it not being improved. Try to run a big Supreme Commander game or any modern game on a single core chip and let me know what happens.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 21, 2011)

Games use sychronized multi-threading because they must.  This means, games are always as fast as the slowest thread.  Processor design is becoming less and less important when compared to software design.


----------



## purefun65 (Sep 21, 2011)

Frick said:


> Indeed it's not perfect, but you can't be serious about it not being improved. Try to run a big Supreme Commander game or any modern game on a single core chip and let me know what happens.


slide show to say the least.


FordGT90Concept said:


> Games use sychronized multi-threading because they must.  This means, games are always as fast as the slowest thread.  Processor design is becoming less and less important when compared to software design.



its becoming the norm. the next dare i say consoles will make this more evident.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 21, 2011)

Frick said:


> Indeed it's not perfect, but you can't be serious about it not being improved. Try to run a big Supreme Commander game or any modern game on a single core chip and let me know what happens.



sup com is the most performance limited game i know of. the AI thread in that caps out so early the other 16 threads (and yes, it has 17 threads) dont even come close to maxing out an extra two cores. its the perfect example of what i was saying - more cores is good, but its worthless if your single threaded performance isnt enough for the task at hand.


if you have 5 threads you can compact them to run on 4 cores, by pairing up two less demanding ones together, but if you had 6 cores and 2 threads - you can only use two threads. if your CPU is too slow to d.o the task at hand (read: mostly engine limitations, like supcoms AI problems) then you cant split it up... so its worthless. add all the cores, memory or hard drives in RAID you want, nothing will fix the problem except a faster performing CPU. i really dont get how this is even arguable?



to go to another conversation i missed at work in this thread, the key benefit to a multiple CPU system over a multi core processor, is that you get an extra memory controller, theoretically doubling (or more) your memory bandwidth - at least when you're multitasking.


----------



## Frick (Sep 21, 2011)

Mussels said:


> i really dont get how this is even arguable?



Ehh me neither. My point was simply that games do benefit from multicore (as in more cores than one core), and that it's not perfect (put the rest of your post here). And you saying it hasn't improved at all I thought meant that it hasn't improved since the dawn of computing, but obvliosly that's not what you mean. 

EDIT: And then you go around saying stuff like this:



Mussels said:


> i just dont like the 'only four cores!' argument. bad company 2 for example, uses all 6 of mine in DX11. as time goes by, more cores get used... and the day that a game needs four cores to run, i'll want 6 or 8 already so that i dont have to quit all my background apps to get smooth gaming...



which makes me think that I probably misunderstood you from the beginning.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Sep 21, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Which part?  Most of it is experience and observation.



The whole CPU redundancy thing. Which is basically the whole post.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Sep 21, 2011)

Dan, would be good to see a benchmark on your 2x5506 system with GTX260. Someone else with their "gamers rig" GTX260 could compare... and it would put this argument to a quick and quiet rest  I bet for the same GPU clocks there would be no FPS loss on your system (at usually playing resolutions). In fact your min framerates would be better.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Sep 21, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> Dan, would be good to see a benchmark on your 2x5506 system with GTX260. Someone else with their "gamers rig" GTX260 could compare... and it would put this argument to a quick and quiet rest  I bet for the same GPU clocks there would be no FPS loss on your system (at usually playing resolutions). In fact your min framerates would be better.



I don't have that rig anymore, well, not in that setup. The board runs with a single CPU and a 8800. The other CPU went into some x58 board and runs my server. I have a 920 as desktop.

The CPU's are identical, the rest of the platform changes little in real world performance. This goes for s1366, s771 (which has horrible memory performance),s 604 , s603,s 370, slot 1. Low/mid end server chips are the same design as their desktop counter parts.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Sep 21, 2011)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> The whole CPU redundancy thing. Which is basically the whole post.



he must mean it's redundant in that if one fails you can take it out and reboot with the 1 working.

I'm hope he's not assuming that the server will just keep on going as if nothing happened.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 21, 2011)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> The whole CPU redundancy thing. Which is basically the whole post.





> http://projectdream.org/wordpress/2007/03/14/hardware-redundancy-in-small-businesses/
> 
> CPU redundancy
> This is a nice add-on feature. Most 2 CPU machines support an automatic reboot to 1 CPU when one of the CPU fails – of course you don’t buy a second CPU just for this, but it’s really nice to have if you have 2 CPUs anyway.





> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc917700.aspx
> 
> Lock-stepped processors, which are two processors that execute the same instruction stream and that crosscheck each other


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 22, 2011)

Hello again! Sorry for the late reply, i had no time to post yesterday. I got the model number of the server and its a HP ProLiant ML110 G3 server, and good news! It looks like it does indeed have a PCI-Express slot


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 22, 2011)

ObSo-1337 said:


> Hello again! Sorry for the late reply, i had no time to post yesterday. I got the model number of the server and its a HP ProLiant ML110 G3 server, and good news! It looks like it does indeed have a PCI-Express slot



Bad news  : But it has only PCIe x4 and x8 so it is a limitation, there are PCIe x1 and maybe x4 or x8 video cards out there but they aren't for gaming


----------



## silkstone (Sep 22, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Bad news  : But it has only PCIe x4 and x8 so it is a limitation, there are PCIe x1 and maybe x4 or x8 video cards out there but they aren't for gaming



There are 8x to 16x adapters available i believe. how much this will limit you depends on if it's pci-e 2.0 or not.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 22, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> Bad news  : But it has only PCIe x4 and x8 so it is a limitation, there are PCIe x1 and maybe x4 or x8 video cards out there but they aren't for gaming



It has a PCI Express x8 link with x16 slot

http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?lang=en&cc=us&objectID=c00457218


```
Expansion Slots	(4) Total I/O slots:
(2) 32-bit/33-MHz 3.3V PCI slots
(1) PCI-Express x4 link with x4 slot
(1) PCI Express x8 link with x16 slot
```

In theory the graphics card should work, but the only limitation left is the BIOS (But so far every server with x16 slot from HP worked with a graphics card)


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 22, 2011)

silkstone said:


> There are 8x to 16x adapters available i believe. how much this will limit you depends on if it's pci-e 2.0 or not.



x8 and x4 have less bandwidth I don't know what video card you are planning to put here, but maybe there are decent ones which can run demanding games. I can't find x8 vid cards on Google only I found PCIe x1 and PCI

Another problem may have is if the server is able to recognize and boot from a video card, because at worst, these slots are only for SCSI/SAS adapters or something, and the server still boots from the IGP.


EDIT: But even if the slot is x16 with 8 lanes connected (The proliant ML350 which I worked has a x8 slot), the limitation is still there, but, at least, you can fit standard x16 cards that meets the PSU requirements. Try one and see if it boot, at best I am wrong 


EDIT2: I saw the specs further and won't give you better performance than a 4-5 year old computer like mine: the best processor available (Intel® Pentium® D Processor 920 (2x2M L2 cache, 2.8 GHz, 800 MHz FSB)) is a bit old, only has 1 CPU socket, it only allows 533 MHz RAM which with ECC is further slower, I don't know currently if allows multiple channels, the exception is that allow 8 GB but many computers (even mine) allows 8 GB.


----------



## zsolt_93 (Sep 22, 2011)

From what i can see that model is single cpu. And it is a Pentium D which is very old by today's standards. If it's that configuration it's not worth it.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Sep 22, 2011)

HP ProLiant ML110 G3 is completely out of date/rubbish. All indications from the HP website say this is a SINGLE CORE Pentium 4 or DUAL CORE Pentium D with Hyperthreading. http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/servers/proliantml110/index.html This is not "intel core" technology but "intel-netburst". And it is certainly NOT a Quad Core.

Don't get it. Rubbish. 

People are trying to dump these at GBP 70 on ebay and they are NOT selling even at that price.

The price offered to you would only be worth considering IF IT CAME WITH A COPY OF WINDOWS SERVER OS. If not. Forget it.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 22, 2011)

zsolt_93 said:


> From what i can see that model is single cpu. And it is a Pentium D which is very old by today's standards. If it's that configuration it's not worth it.



8x PCI-E wont hamper bandwidth to hurt gaming much, but if its pentium D based, then its definitely not worth gaming on.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 22, 2011)

def not worth the money. you can build a nice used AMD Athlon X2 for around the same price.


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 22, 2011)

Mussels said:


> 8x PCI-E wont hamper bandwidth to hurt gaming much, but if its pentium D based, then its definitely not worth gaming on.



Is Pentium D more or less equivalent to mine Athlon 64 X2 Windsor? I am curious


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 22, 2011)

ummm nope. pentium D was two pentium 4 net burst cores and well below a Athlon X2, even a windsor.

I would say the pentium D 9xx series and the lowest athlon x2 windsor would be close but the higher ones like 4000+ and above would beat it due to better technology at the time.

If you want I could run a test with a 4400+ windsor my father in law has compared to a Pentium D

*EDIT*

I found this chart, it shows some of the more expensive Pentium D's at the time keeping up with Athlon X2 939 chips.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2006/3DMark06-CPU,36.html


----------



## repman244 (Sep 22, 2011)

brandonwh64 said:


> ummm nope. pentium D was two pentium 4 net burst cores and well below a Athlon X2, even a windsor.
> 
> I would say the pentium D 9xx series and the lowest athlon x2 windsor would be close but the higher ones like 4000+ and above would beat it due to better technology at the time.
> 
> ...



Pentium D was designed to run in winter time so that it would keep your room warm without any additional heating. So it does have it's strong points 

Joking aside, I don't think it's worth the £75.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 22, 2011)

LOL yea my Pentium D 805 and 820's were very hot @ 4ghz and from benching, were still slower than a C2D E3200 HAHA


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 22, 2011)

brandonwh64 said:


> ummm nope. pentium D was two pentium 4 net burst cores and well below a Athlon X2, even a windsor.
> 
> I would say the pentium D 9xx series and the lowest athlon x2 windsor would be close but the higher ones like 4000+ and above would beat it due to better technology at the time.
> 
> ...



Many thanks  My exact CPU appears in that list with 1555 points, while the more powerful Pentium D of the list (Pentium D 960) has 1831. seems to be that they are paired ... except the TDP


----------



## Disparia (Sep 22, 2011)

Yeah, I'd keep with the X2.

My X2 at 2.5Ghz outpaced and overall just felt better than my P4D @ 4Ghz.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 22, 2011)

I miss my love the Athlon X2 5000+ Black edition (Brisbane) that I OCed to 3.9ghz on a 780G board


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 22, 2011)

Oh well. Thanks for the help and support guys. You have saved me £75!


----------



## Derek12 (Sep 22, 2011)

ObSo-1337 said:


> Oh well. Thanks for the help and support guys. You have saved me £75!



yeah, you can get a better regular computer from second hand with that price


----------



## ObSo-1337 (Sep 22, 2011)

Derek12 said:


> yeah, you can get a better regular computer from second hand with that price



Yeah. I was looking for a cheap upgrade for my computer at my dads. I'll look into upgrade the individual parts instead  Thanks again everyone


----------



## brandonwh64 (Sep 22, 2011)

You can luck up sometimes on the FS threads, I seen a 780G motherboard and athlong X2 5400+ go for 50$ shipped not too long ago!


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Sep 22, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> http://projectdream.org/wordpress/2007/03/14/hardware-redundancy-in-small-businesses/
> 
> CPU redundancy
> This is a nice add-on feature. Most 2 CPU machines support an automatic reboot to 1 CPU when one of the CPU fails – of course you don’t buy a second CPU just for this, but it’s really nice to have if you have 2 CPUs anyway.
> ...



Show me a readily available board that lists support for lockstep for CPU's, not some random guys blog.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Sep 23, 2011)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Show me a readily available board that lists support for lockstep for CPU's, not some random guys blog.



All i needed to see was reboot. by default that = a service interupt. The length of which is going to be dependant on what the server is running. 

a second cpu isn't like raid, in raid the server fires off a trap and you can go swap out the drive without ever having a single service interupt. 

no matter what when a cpu dies on a server you get a service intreupt and that to me doesn't = true redundancy.


----------



## Andrew Tom (Apr 21, 2018)

I have an IBM x3400 server sitting in my home. Can I *game* on it after putting a 1060 in it?


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 21, 2018)

Yes You Can Game on it  ( to some Degree )
what sort of Games ? are you thinking of
List the Spec's and the Members will offer their opinions and some suggestions

Fill this page in >>>>     (the more info you give the more help you can expect to receive)
 >>> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/account/specs


----------



## Old-Greg (Apr 21, 2018)

IBM x3400 server . Perhaps some light 'Chuckie Egg' gaming on that machine 

Back on topic,  I used to own an HP ML110 server with a Xeon X3450, Installed a GTX 660 in it and it was great for light gaming.


----------



## Jetster (Apr 21, 2018)

Andrew Tom said:


> I have an IBM x3400 server sitting in my home. Can I *game* on it after putting a 1060 in it?


Holly necro thread

I think it only has 8X pci-e


----------



## Andrew Tom (Apr 22, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> Yes You Can Game on it  ( to some Degree )
> what sort of Games ? are you thinking of
> List the Spec's and the Members will offer their opinions and some suggestions
> 
> ...



I have filled in the details . I don't plan to go hardcore on it. Just some decent 30-40 Fps, 1080p, Low or medium detail on most games. I'm more into racing so games like NFS, Forza, Gran Turismo are some of them in my list.

Another thing is that this thing runs loud A.F. Anything I can do bout it?


----------



## Norton (Apr 22, 2018)

Andrew Tom said:


> Another thing is that this thing runs loud A.F. Anything I can do bout it?


Not likely- most servers rely on small high rpm fans to direct air through the case and over the cpu coolers. 

Looking at your model, it looks like there is no way to install a different cooler on the cpu(s) or inside the case.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 22, 2018)

Andrew Tom said:


> Another thing is that this thing runs loud A.F. Anything I can do bout it?


 Have you heard of the expression ghetto mods
you are only limited by your wallet and your imagination


----------



## Andrew Tom (Apr 22, 2018)

Anything about what I can do to game on it?
Thanks for the responses guys.


----------

