Some Thoughts on AMD versus Intel

The following is a direct copy and paste of a post to an e-mail list that I belong to. It discusses some of the reasons behind our not dealing with AMD product as a rule.

AMD versus Intel

We were burned by a bad run of Asus boards a while back.

Our first venture back into AMD with an Asus based board ended in failure. That was the last time we looked at Asus for boards and AMD for processors.

Asus has some great products. We run with their corporate EeeBox PCs both factory built and using their bare bones units for certain applications. They are extremely fast, light weight, and easy to mount almost anywhere. With an 80GB 320 Series Intel SSD installed the EeeBox PC EB1012P is an awesome entry level (word processing, some picture editing, and light weight computing needs) unit that can outperform any entry level PC the way we configure them.

The only recent beef I have with Asus is that their support and RMA process is a bear to work with. A real PITA x100.

On the Intel side of things we have had one or two manufacturer’s situations that required RMAs (bad caps). We have had a number of RMAs that were due to user “interaction” with the systems (wool + polyester + Canadian dry winters = dead on touch). Many case manufacturers have the grounding shields around the front USB ports _not grounded_ in any way.

As far as the AMD versus Intel situation, the biggest cost to us when it comes to supporting non-Tier 1 servers, desktops, workstations, and laptops is in the troubleshooting and RMA process. We are on the hook for a good chunk of that if the problem turns out to be hardware related after all. The exception to that is for on-site troubleshooting which is billable in most cases.

AMD has for years been trying to build up an ecosystem similar to Intel for their partners. The problem with AMD on all platforms is that it does not _own_ all aspects of the ecosystem. Intel does. As a result, when we have a problem we have 1 number to call, an advanced warranty program that sends out a replacement to our door within 24 hours, and an amazing support structure both on the Web and via phone.

So, not only do we pay a premium for Supercom, Tyan, LSI, and other components for an AMD based server we have to figure out which way to go when we have a hardware problem. There are no finger pointing matches when it comes to Intel product. There are when it comes to trying to deal with several different manufacturers that try and blame the other (certain Tier 1s are bad for this at their entry level support/warranties via phone too) on the AMD platform. BTDT and burned that t-shirt but good man.

When it comes to server product we have the Intel Server Configurator. This online tool gives us the ability to tailor a server system to our client’s needs. It also contains a wealth of components that have been tested and approved for each server component combination possible with Intel server product. At last look by us there was virtually no such database for AMD based server products. So, for the system builder they may need to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars for components and then a lot of time testing those components to see if they play nice together.

We have 2 Intel Server Adapters (Quad Port ET2s) that were mistakenly ordered for a 2 node cluster (we assumed (yeah yeah) that they would show up on the approved list) sitting on a shelf waiting for a new Intel Server System that they are approved for. That error on my part cost us almost a grand.

We spent over $15K-$25K for product R&D this last year and who knows how much in time. We did end up with a viable product at the end of it and it is selling really well.

http://blog.mpecsinc.ca/search/label/Intel%20SR1695GPRX (Post 2 outlines everything – 2 Node for under $20K).

We are working with IBM on a similar configuration using their products (gives us access to 4 hour response times for hardware issues). Dell and HP have failed to follow-up on any inquiries or nowhere near capable of a similar setup. IBM has been really good about facilitating our configuration questions.

Conclusion

We have put a lot of time and effort into getting to know what products and system configurations are best suited to our client’s needs. This effort includes both physical and Cloud based products.

Unfortunately AMD has not come up with a viable partner support system that makes their products attractive to us at this time. Plus, any time we have ventured back into AMD territory, as mentioned above, we have hit a wall or product failure that lead to RMA pain.

So, we will stick with Intel for both server and desktop/workstation platforms for now. Their products have been very reliable with any support or RMAs being facilitated with an excellent partner ecosystem.

• Intel Partner Program

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists
Co-Author: SBS 2008 Blueprint Book

*Our original iMac was stolen (previous blog post). We now have a new MacBook Pro courtesy of Vlad Mazek, owner of OWN.

Windows Live Writer

AMD (ATI) Catalyst 11.8 Drivers Available

One of our machines popped up a request to update the AMD (ATI) drivers on the machine:

Now, once we clicked through on the Express setup for the driver. Something along the way died out. Instead of clicking on any of the buttons just click on the Red X to allow the installation to move forward.

The install will complete successfully as indicated above.

We opened the Catalyst Control Center to verify that everything was good to go:

Everything checks out okay.

Hopefully this version is as stable as its predecessor. :)

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists
Co-Author: SBS 2008 Blueprint Book

*Our original iMac was stolen (previous blog post). We now have a new MacBook Pro courtesy of Vlad Mazek, owner of OWN.

Windows Live Writer

Serving VDI with RemoteFX Enabled

Trying to find any current information on RemoteFX and what GPUs we can use to run the feature in our Windows 7 VMs has been quite the challenge.

Our first stop in the process of finding information was this page:

• Microsoft TechNet: Hardware Considerations for RemoteFX

RemoteFX CPU Compatibility

The first hardware consideration has to do with the server hardware and its capabilities:

1. SLAT-enabled processor   The processor in the RemoteFX server must support Second-Level Address Translation (SLAT). In virtualization scenarios, hardware-based SLAT support improves performance. On Intel processors, this is called Extended Page Tables (EPT), and on AMD processors, it is called Nested Page Tables (NPT).
2. GPU   At least one graphics processing unit (GPU) is required on the RemoteFX server. The GPU driver must support DirectX 9.0c and DirectX 10.0. If more than one GPU is installed in the RemoteFX server, the GPUs must be identical. The GPU must have sufficient dedicated video memory that is separate from system memory.

Now, there are two links to hardware related articles just below the above but they have not been updated in quite a while. So, we are left searching about for any possible leads.

One of the configurations we are looking for is to deliver the virtual desktops via Hyper-V Failover Cluster. In order to do that, we must take note of the caveat stated in the TechNet article:

Important

To use Live Migration, the source and destination RemoteFX servers must have the same GPU installed.

We have seen it also noted that a server with multiple GPUs installed into the same server must use the same card.

AMD and NVIDIA

Since we have two major video card manufacturers that have mentioned RemoteFX we did some searching on their sites for anything related to it:

1. AMD (ATI) RemoteFX Search Results
• The FirePro product line is mentioned.
• A relatively recent article (August 15, 2011) on their site: AMD FirePro™ Wears Multiple Hats in the Data Center.
2. nVidia RemoteFX Search Results
• NVIDIA® Quadro® drives Microsoft RemoteFX
• 
• NVIDIA Tesla M2070Q

As we can see, a 1U form factor is definitely out for both manufacturer’s products. Both the AMD 4GB part and the NVIDIA Tesla 6GB part take up two PCI-E slots.

Now that we have an idea of what is available in GPUs we need to look at our server configurations. For now, there are not a lot of choices in 2U form factor that have more than one or possibly 2 PCI-E 2.0 16x slots in them.

When we go above 2U we have options but from what we can see at this point we are looking at 4 CPU server systems to gain access to more than two PCI-E 2.0 16x slots truly wired for 16 lanes.

Once we get into that level of server configuration the $8K sticker price for the Tesla M2070Q starts to look a little more palatable.

RemoteFX GPU Performance

We now have a better grasp on where to find the necessary GPUs, but what about performance?

From the TechNet article linked above we find this grid:

The first thing we see is that the display resolutions are going to be a bit difficult to work with due to the fact that most folks have either 22” to 24” wide LCD monitors on their desktop. The 24: may have enough vertical resolution to handle 1280x1024 but that is about it.

Note the required amount of GPU memory for each resolution and number of monitors. In most cases users will run a single monitor with a few exceptions.

For two monitors running 1280x1024 at 175MB each session a 6GB Tesla would host about 30 sessions per card.

• $8K/30 Sessions = $267/Session

For one monitor running 1920x1200 we are looking at about 25 sessions per 6GB Tesla.

• $8K/25 Sessions = $320/Session

Given a 36 month solution life that cost is actually quite reasonable.

RemoteFX and Clusters

Now the kicker, one of the driving reasons behind our looking into RemoteFX is a client that is looking to do VDI for 130 to 150 desktops _on a Hyper-V Failover Cluster_.

This means that if we are looking to build a robust two node Hyper-V Failover Cluster that each node must be configured to run the _entire_ VDI environment.

So, we will be looking at some alternatives that will allow us to run three or even four nodes connected to the same Promise VTrak E610sD RAID Subsystem that the LSI SAS Switches will allow us to do.

Direct Attached Storage via SAS 3Gbit or 6Gbit quad port connections out performs Gigabit based iSCSI (even with multiple Gigabit ports via MPIO) in so many ways plus MPIO configuration for the SAS connections is a lot easier to work with.

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists
Co-Author: SBS 2008 Blueprint Book

*Our original iMac was stolen (previous blog post). We now have a new MacBook Pro courtesy of Vlad Mazek, owner of OWN.

Windows Live Writer

HP ProLiant MicroServer

While at the MVP Summit those of us in the SBS and WHS specialities received a gift from HP. That gift was an HP ProLiant MicroServer with a 250GB hard disk and 1GB of RAM.

Once we had a bit of time we pulled it apart to see what was up and also to install RAM:

The server board sits on a tray that is held in place by the two blue thumb screws.

Once we slid the tray out we had full access to the RAM slots along with the two PCI-E slots that allow us to install a half height half length add-in card.

We installed the two 4GB ECC DRAM DIMMs to bring the server’s RAM up to 8GB because the 1GB just was not cutting it with Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard.

Note that there is no hot swap backplane in this unit so any hard disk maintenance needs to be accomplished with the server offline.

When installing an optical drive or an addition set of hard disks the mounting screws are located in the front door panel.

• Optical drive screws and hex key tool.

• Hard disk drive mounting screws located in the front door panel.

This unit is _really_ quiet. It is quite suited to sitting on or under a desk somewhere in a small office with no one ever knowing that it even exists.

We are inclined to see the MicroServer as a the platform of choice for the small 5-10 seat office with the Microsoft Windows Small Business Server Essentials 2011 operating system.

Or, the MicroServer makes a great standalone DC for those clients that we are setting up with a simple two node DAS based Hyper-V cluster.

One thing to be mindful of when it comes to the out of the box configuration is that the on board software RAID setup is quite limited for bandwidth. So, a fairly active engineering or architectural firm that is moving a lot of data from a single point may not benefit from this box without an add-in RAID controller.

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists
Co-Author: SBS 2008 Blueprint Book

*Our original iMac was stolen (previous blog post). We now have a new MacBook Pro courtesy of Vlad Mazek, owner of OWN.

Windows Live Writer

System Builder Tip: Asus M2A-VM toasted :(

As mentioned in our previous post, System Builder Tip: Vista Aero Performance Rating - ATI X1250 on AMD 690G Chipset, we obtained an Asus M2A-VM and an AMD 4400+ via the AMT TechTour offer a while back.

This being our first venture back into AMD territory for many years, we have been putting the Asus/AMD package through a fairly basic office environment test.

The system has been on all of the time, with reboots for updates and the like. We had Windows Vista Business loaded on it as well along with the necessary applications we need on a day to day basis.

Well, the system crashed yesterday. It started behaving strange with components like the NIC coming and going, then lockups happening, to it now being utterly unresponsive.

We have no reprieve but to go to Asus' Web site for warranty support. We are required to register the product and our ownership on their site before we can go forward to an RMA process. But, we keep getting a "Server too busy" error message when we try to register.

And so ends our foray into Asus/AMD territory. :(

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists

*All Mac on SBS posts are posted on our in-house iMac via the Safari Web browser.

Business Principles: AMD Drops the Ball...

A while back, we were quite excited about heading down to Calgary to attend the AMD Microsoft Retail Tour (previous blog post).

One thing we were looking forward to was the bonus bundle:

Keystone - Ultimate Experience Bundle Offer

At that time, the pictured Windows Vista Ultimate in FPP (Fully Packaged Product - Retail) seemingly made the bonus bundle a very attractive option for us.

The tour itself was okay, with a lot of the information from Microsoft being a rehash of information on the 2007 version products being released or soon to be released.

The information from AMD was along the lines of what we were expecting as well. With the new Intel Core 2 line of processors wresting the performance crown away from AMD for the first time in 5 years, the information was a little on the iffy side as far as processor comparison charts and the like.

So, a question to you: Given your experience attending Microsoft and possibly Intel conferences and seminars of various sorts, what product license version of Vista Ultimate would you be expecting when the bonus bundled arrived?

If you have attended any type of vendor/manufacturer/supplier conference, you would probably answer FPP - Retail. Why? Because, in all of our experience, that is the only product licensing type we have ever seen being given away.

So, imagine our surprise when the bundle arrived and we had received an OEM version of Windows Vista Ultimate NFR.

Why does OEM NFR not work for an I.T. shop? Because, a desktop system does not last long in our organization. Once it goes out the door, it is gone. OEM licenses are not transferable to the new system owners. Our clients that purchase those systems are also purchasing a new OEM license with it. And, they activate the OS based on the new OEM license they purchased.

That is why we purchase FPP - Retail product and Open Value SA to augment our MAPS licensing for our internal desktop OSs. OEM does not make sense for us.

Our response was to send a note to the marketing company that sponsored the bundle: Keystone.

Part of the response from Keystone:

This offer is only available to either (A) a system builder or reseller of Microsoft software, or (B) an employee of a Microsoft retail partner. Complete eligibility details available at time of purchase.

As you will note, it does indicate that the packaging may vary from the picture. I thank you, in advance, for your understanding of this matter.

Unfortunately, there is no polite way to respond to the second line in the response.

So, we replied to Keystone and CCd AMD:

[We] have a beef with regards to the AMD/Microsoft TechTour bonus bundle. The images show Vista FPP and the description offers NFR for Vista. The general assumption, given previous Microsoft conference experience - they always give out FPP - is that we would receive a Fully Packaged retail NFR version. Instead, we received an OEM/OEI Vista Ultimate copy.

The caveat listed below the picture of the products, "Packaging may vary from picture", in my opinion does not cover the difference between OEM and FPP product. It covers whatever the product COMES in.

Given the fact that this is our first venture back into AMD product territory in over five years - we were burned very badly by a string of bad AMD based product - it is not boding well for AMD.

An OEM - NFR tag on the coupon for the Vista Ultimate product would have been the best way to describe it, and also would have resulted in a No-Sale as the deal would no longer appear to be one.

The OEM - NFR tag would have made things a lot more straight forward, as the message would have been, "This is the exact product you are getting" as opposed to, "This is the product you may be getting - or not getting".

I personally do NOT like this kind of advertising. As a business owner, our company being Microsoft Small Business Specialists, we take great care to make sure that our clients know exactly what they are getting. There are no caveats in our descriptions.

Please advise me as to how you want to proceed.

Thanks,

Philip Elder MCP
President & CEO
MPECS Inc.

AMD responded that the presenter would have mentioned that the Vista Ultimate would be an OEM copy. Both my colleague and I did not hear that as we were avidly listening during the portion of the presentation that focused on the bundle.

What could we do? We followed up with the AMD representative and let them know that all was forgiven. In response, they in turned promised to rectify the situation after coming back from a vacation break. They only asked that we send them a reminder to do so after they were back.

We sent three reminders over three weeks and nothing happened.

It is unfortunate that the AMD did not follow through on their commitment to make things right.

We all know the cliché: "The customer is always right".

And, as small I.T. shop owners, this is even more true. There are times where we need to bite the bullet and make things right with our client ... even if it costs us.

There is nothing more damaging to a business' reputation than a cranky former client/customer ... as this blog post can attest to. ;)

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists

*All Mac on SBS posts are posted on our in-house iMac via the Safari Web browser.

System Builder Tip: Vista Aero Performance Rating - ATI X1250 on AMD 690G Chipset

A while back, we went to the AMD/Microsoft TechTour which offered us a Tour Bundle at a discount over purchasing through distribution.

According to the coupon we received to redeem for the bundle, we were to get an AMD X2 4400+, Asus M2A-VM AM2 series motherboard, a copy of Windows Vista Ultimate NFR, and a one year subscription to McAfee's security product *cough*. ;0)

We decided to take a risk and purchase the bundle.

This is the first time in over five (5) years that we have purchased anything AMD!

Why? Because, we were burned so badly by a number of AMD based systems back then that we never turned back. We had to fight with the motherboards to work with any add-in cards like network or video for example. Or, we had to fight to get the drivers to work properly or the system to run stable at all. There were a number of times we were replacing components or motherboards to get things to play together nicely. Any so-called cost savings was obliterated by the time fighting with the systems.

So, that was that. Remember the three strike rule? :D

And here we are, with the processor, motherboard, some Kingston RAM, a couple of 320 GB Seagates setup in a RAID 1 array and having just finished installing Windows Vista Ultimate.

All in all, the install went smoothly.

The one glitch we ran into was getting Vista to recognize the on board ATI X1250 video subsystem. Vista refused to. After fighting with it for about half an hour, we extracted the driver ZIP file, and went into the Device Manager and forced the driver to update via the Update Drivers button on the Standard VGA driver.

After a reboot the Standard VGA was still there, though the display setting was reset to 640 x 480. So, tried one more reboot and it worked. We now had Vista recognizing the video as an ATI X1250.

By the way, we had a bit of a struggle trying to figure out where to find the video driver in the first place. The lingo used on Asus' site didn't have anything labelled video. It only had what turned out to be one massive "chipset" driver:


Um, Intel's "chipset" drivers tend to be something like 2-3 MB. So, the only logical conclusion with a 149 MB download, is that Asus packages both the chipset and video drivers together.

That is a pretty chunky download by the way.

Here is the current Catalyst driver size:

A whole whopping 40 MB.

So, take 3 MB for Intel's chipset drivers and 40 MB for ATI's Catalyst drivers, and that leaves 100 MB+ of what exactly? Not too sure on that.

The first run at the Windows System Assessment Tool failed. That was after the first reboot post ATI driver install.

The Windows System Assessment Tool ran fine after the second reboot.

Here is how the ATI X1250 did:



Desktop performance for Windows Aero scored a 2.5 and the 3D business and gaming graphics performance scored a 2.8.

So, how does the on board ATI X1250 stack up to Intel's on board GMA 3000 series video chipset?

Not really that well I am afraid.

In our System Builder Tip: Vista Aero Performance Rating - Intel GMA 3000 on DQ965GF and ATI FireMV 2200 PCI-E,

the on board GMA 3000 series graphics ran a 3.9 score for Vista Aero and a 3.7 score for 3D Graphics.

Intel's 945GM chipset in a Toshiba Portégé M500 had a Desktop performance for Windows Aero score of 2.0 while the 3D business and gaming graphics performance scored 2.8.

For most users that use the Internet, e-mail, and perhaps Microsoft Office this performance level would be okay.

I think that the occasional gamer may be a bit disappointed in the ATI X1250 performance and go out and pick up at least an ATI X1600 or above to get better performance.

Please keep in mind that since this is our first foray into AMD in so many years, we are not exactly up on what's the fastest and newest stuff from them and those that manufacture their system parts. So, hopefully we won't need any flame retardant underwear! ;)

This particular box is going to be our test desktop mule for our SBS Cougar beta testing. So, it is going to get a lot of use, as well as tear downs. Hopefully it is up to the task.

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists

TechNet - Future of the Server Room Tour

We are off this afternoon to the Microsoft TechNet Future of the Server Room Tour '07 in Calgary tomorrow.

We are going to stay down in Calgary, as the Microsoft/AMD Tech Tour is on Thursday afternoon/evening.

Probably pick up a couple of the AMD specials listed on the AMD site as we are listed as AMD OEMs.

Posting may be light this week as a result.

Philip Elder
MPECS Inc.
Microsoft Small Business Specialists