Home > Intel Communities > Open Port IT Community > The Server Room > Blog > 2009 > April > 08
Up to Blog Posts in The Server Room
Previous Next

The Server Room Blog

Currently Being Moderated
Alan Priestley
1

There has been lots of discussion recently about whether its better to replace or upgrade existing CPUs in your installed base of servers rather than purchase new servers. I wanted to share some thoughts with you that might clarify why a new server purchase is the better option for most IT departments.


Here are some of the challenges that an IT department must face when considering replacing CPUs rather than buying new servers.

  1. Does the existing system support the new CPU – most CPUs require specific BIOS versions, is there a BIOS update available for the server that supports the new CPU ? Also the server motherboard may not have been tested by the OEM with the new CPU.
  2. Has the software stack you are running on the server  been validated on the new CPU.
  3. Replacing a CPU is a non-trivial exercise – it takes time and you run the risk of damaging a working server
    • the server must be shut down and dismantled to access the existing CPU
    • the existing CPU/heatsink combo must be removed. The heatsinks used by OEMs in branded servers are specifically designed for the server in which they are used. These heatsinks typically have significant mass so they are usually very firmly attached to the server chassis to prevent damage due to shock and vibration whilst in transit and in use.
      • The existing heatsink must be removed from the current CPU, which may not be easy if the system has been in use for some time the thermal bonding may have hardened permanently attaching the heatsink to the CPU.
      • The heatsink must be attached to the new CPU – with the appropriate thermal bonding.
      • The CPU/heatsink combo must then be correctly re-installed in the system and the system re-assembled.
    • It is also necessary to take into account that removing/changing a CPU may also void or otherwise affect the system warranty.


    It is conceivable that some IT folk may want to consider this approach but the risks associated with undertaking this operation are very high and many IT departments will take the approach of not touching working systems.  If you are still not convinced its also worth considering -


    • Replacing the CPU in an old server may not significantly improve its energy efficiency. The latest generation server designs not only use latest CPUs but they incorporate many new features that improve the overall energy efficiency of the complete platform – making them a much better proposition when looking to reduce overall data centre utility bills and OpEx costs.
    • Upgrading the CPUs in an old server may expose other limitations of the server in terms of memory and I/O, this could result in having to upgrade many other parts of the server resulting in an overall higher cost than replacing the server with a new purpose designed solution

     

    So, as far as I can see very few IT departments are going to seriously consider replacing CPUs in their existing installed base and will look instead to deploy latest generation high performance energy efficient server designs – i.e. servers based on Xeon 5500 or Xeon 7400


    What’s your opinion – are you prepared to attempt to upgrade your CPUs or will you refresh the complete server system to get the latest technology for all elements of the server platform

    Tags: xeon_7400, refresh, xeon, data_center, energy_efficiency, server, datacenter, xeon_5500


    Add a comment Leave a comment on this blog post.
    Apr 9, 2009 2:26 PM Chris P_Intel Chris P_Intel    says:

    Alan, Some additional thoughts.

     

    One is HW warranty.  If my memory servers (and i'm going back a few years now), the drivers of server failure (when/if they occur ... and that's not too often) are more often due to fans, HDD and other system components.  So upgrading your processor does not really extend the life of your server or improve the reliability, whereas a new server will come with a new warranty and by definition a longer life with newer technologies.

     

    Second - Validation at both HW and SW level.  My experience in talking about technology with IT is that any change is significant and requires some level of people resources and time to validate that the combination of HW and SW function properly before putting any server system into production.  While replacing only a CPU is smaller effort, it is an effort, and one that will deliver less value.

     

    Third.  Server Refresh and Replacement is not a new industry concept and is not being discussed only because of economic situation.  It is a standard business practice.   Technology moves at a feverous pace and the capabilities today are dramatically better than they were just a few years ago -- existing solutions age and become outdated as business requirements change.  What is exciting to me is that the pace of innovation in the past 4 years has dramatically accelerated making the value proposition for server replacement one of the strongest we have ever seen.  Upgrading a piece of a server or system can be a stop gap move doesn't take full advantage of the opportunity in front of us.

     

    My gut says server refresh is a better value and approach than CPU refresh for anyone who is running a real business or enterprise with a server and not doing testing in a lab -- but I'm open to real IT user input on what approach they are taking.

     

    Interesting Debate -- Thanks for the post .. i'll give some more thought and research to this topic and may come back again.
    Reply

    Actions

    Popular Blog Posts