AMD Ryzen 9 5950x good for hosting?

Shakib

@coolice said:
It is not without boost you just do not see it if you run

watch -n.1 "lscpu | grep MHz

on the node you will see that it is or n1 if you want it slower

I got to reproduce that with 7.4.3 version from where but will be later today

coolice

not on the VM on the proxmox node

AXYZE

@Shakib said:

@AXYZE said:
5950X is the best hosting CPU. Awesome performance for PHP, Node.js, Python(Django), nginx etc.

For PHP 11900K can be a little bit faster, but for nodejs there is bigger difference, but in favor of 5950X. Overall 5950X is best buy. One box that can do anything.

The problem is most people here ain't gonna buy the whole box. Most likely they will get a few vCores on a VPS.

Overall performance gonna decrease for all VPS once more VMs gets crammed into that one box. Which also affects I/O and bandwidth speeds.

Benchmarks don't lie (well, not usually).
I have seen quite a bit of single core performance difference between i9 11900K and Ryzen 3900X, 5950X when i compared with multiple benchmarks of other provider's Ryzen VPS.

I am not denying that Ryzen is faster on multi core performance.
But, more frequency and single core performance is what really matters in my machines and i care about. 🙃

Just like I said - in single core 11900K has edge, but in multicore 5950X crushes 11900K.

I dont know why you are talking about VPSes here and that LET readers go with 3900X based VPSes. He just asked if 5950X is good CPU for web servers. And now you all compare benchmarks if 5950X is good enough for that, comparing to only one Intel CPU that doesnt support ECC memory.... LET

Shakib

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

coolice

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

Mine boost only to 4.4 Ghz during the test cause i have 3-8 CPU fully loaded at that time window (EU server) 33 sec result is with that max boost

Shakib

@coolice said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

Mine boost only to 4.4 Ghz during the test cause i have 3-8 CPU fully loaded at that time window (EU server) 33 sec result is with that max boost

Good luck, hope you can catch up with my 26.769 sec result very soon.

Daniel15

@ChaoscripT said: Most of my websites are with Wordpress CMS, uses PHP/MySQL, if there is any chance to use it with multi cores, and it's gives more performance it will be good.

If you're using WordPress then you should be using a cache plugin that caches to disk. WP Super Cache is my favourite one. In that case, most page loads won't even hit PHP - They'll just serve cached HTML files directly from disk. This is very efficient (all it's doing is taking data from disk and sending it to the user) so it doesn't need much CPU. The slowest thing will be the SSL/TLS encryption, which hardware-accelerated AES (supposed by all modern CPUs) helps with.

serv_ee

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

Mine boost only to 4.4 Ghz during the test cause i have 3-8 CPU fully loaded at that time window (EU server) 33 sec result is with that max boost

Good luck, hope you can catch up with my 26.769 sec result very soon.

You really are cute with your shilling.

He doesn't really need to catch up to your 26 seconds since he doesn't need the extra power draw (since most bill you per A) and heat dissipation. Also how's that ECC doing? Oh wait..

But I guess for dick measuring contest it's perfect.

Every single hardware review site agrees that the 11900k is just an power hungry CPU (due to it's limits from the 14++++++++++++++) just to try to keep up with AMD. But someone on a server site clearly knows better. Even saying it's faster than EPYC. Yeah, no shit a 5ghz cpu is faster than 2-3ghz server CPU.

Shakib

@serv_ee said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

Mine boost only to 4.4 Ghz during the test cause i have 3-8 CPU fully loaded at that time window (EU server) 33 sec result is with that max boost

Good luck, hope you can catch up with my 26.769 sec result very soon.

You really are cute with your shilling.

He doesn't really need to catch up to your 26 seconds since he doesn't need the extra power draw (since most bill you per A) and heat dissipation. Also how's that ECC doing? Oh wait..

But I guess for dick measuring contest it's perfect.

Every single hardware review site agrees that the 11900k is just an power hungry CPU (due to it's limits from the 14++++++++++++++) just to try to keep up with AMD. But someone on a server site clearly knows better. Even saying it's faster than EPYC. Yeah, no shit a 5ghz cpu is faster than 2-3ghz server CPU.

I know my 11900k is faster than Ryzen and EPYC in most use cases. I was just trying proving that as other members were not agreeing with me.

Nothing wrong with that.

serv_ee

@Shakib said:

@serv_ee said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:

@Shakib said:

@coolice said:
not on the VM on the proxmox node

Mine boost only to 4.4 Ghz during the test cause i have 3-8 CPU fully loaded at that time window (EU server) 33 sec result is with that max boost

Good luck, hope you can catch up with my 26.769 sec result very soon.

You really are cute with your shilling.

He doesn't really need to catch up to your 26 seconds since he doesn't need the extra power draw (since most bill you per A) and heat dissipation. Also how's that ECC doing? Oh wait..

But I guess for dick measuring contest it's perfect.

Every single hardware review site agrees that the 11900k is just an power hungry CPU (due to it's limits from the 14++++++++++++++) just to try to keep up with AMD. But someone on a server site clearly knows better. Even saying it's faster than EPYC. Yeah, no shit a 5ghz cpu is faster than 2-3ghz server CPU.

I know my 11900k is faster than Ryzen and EPYC in most use cases. I was just trying proving that as other members were not agreeing with me.

Nothing wrong with that.

It's faster in specific use cases while drawing 100w+ more power. That's not an ideal trade off in my opinion.

And comparing low clocked, high core count CPU to an opposite just ins't the right thing to do.

ChaoscripT

@Daniel15 said:

@ChaoscripT said: Most of my websites are with Wordpress CMS, uses PHP/MySQL, if there is any chance to use it with multi cores, and it's gives more performance it will be good.

If you're using WordPress then you should be using a cache plugin that caches to disk. WP Super Cache is my favourite one. In that case, most page loads won't even hit PHP - They'll just serve cached HTML files directly from disk. This is very efficient (all it's doing is taking data from disk and sending it to the user) so it doesn't need much CPU. The slowest thing will be the SSL/TLS encryption, which hardware-accelerated AES (supposed by all modern CPUs) helps with.

As I use Litespeed Hosting, I using LSCache plugin. (I don't know if it's served cached HTML files.

Regards.