Folks,

Dumb question but one that for some strange reason we can't get a
definitive answer about.  Xeon processors with hyperthreading seem to
appear as two processors instead of one to both Windows 2000 Server and
Server 2003.  I thought that 2003 would be able to differentiate between
the physical processors and the virtual processors.  In addition, I've seen
conflicting documentation on Microsoft's site stating that Standard Server
2003 supports up to two processors and supports up to four processors.

That said, if we are building HP DL380G3's with hyperthreading would we
need Enterprise Server 2003 or Standard?  We're planning on using them for
domain controllers and we're trying to remember why we ordered Enterprise
Server 2003 when it appears that the much less expensive Standard Server
2003 would suffice.

We're running DL380G3's and BL20pG2's with two processors and Standard
Server 2003 seems to be running fine.  But is it taking full advantage of
the processors or running in some sort of crippled mode where it doesn't
utilize the hyperthreading?  Perfmon seems to show that it's using both of
the physicals and both of the virtuals...but...

Any info would be appreciated.


Thanks,
Mike



******************* PLEASE NOTE *******************
This E-Mail/telefax message and any documents accompanying this
transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information and is
intended solely for the addressee(s) named above.  If you are not the
intended addressee/recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of,
disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on the contents of this
E-Mail/telefax information is strictly prohibited and may result in legal
action against you. Please reply to the sender advising of the error in
transmission and immediately delete/destroy the message and any
accompanying documents.  Thank you.

List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to