Windows Server 2008 or Windows 7 Professional

[ghanja]

I've searched and read through post titles that -may- have answered my question as far back as 2007, far enough I believe considering this is regarding Windows Server 2008.

That said. I have a server (HP DL360 G5 w/ 32MB RAM - Dual Xeon, etc.) that I'd like to use as an EQEMU server. Overkill perhaps, especially since I'm not certain it will ever go public. Though, in the chance that it does, it should be able to handle things just fine.

I'm curious though, is Windows Server 2008 necessary? With the exception of not finding an "official" HP drivers for the p400i raid controller for Windows 7, I cannot think of the benefit to run Server 2008. Both Windows 7 and Server 2008 will support the dual xeon server. Windows 7 had more 'junk' load during boot up, though killing the services (media player, etc.) should alleviate a good deal of it's memory hogging well enough. Virtualization, not interested in it, albeit there seem to be third party software to handle this just fine if it's something I wanted to do (the machine will run just EQEMU, period).

Thoughts? I mean, I know Server 2008 is focused on being just that, a server OS, but, necessary for something like EQEMU? Necessary period?

[sorvani]

you can run the server on XP if you want. there is no big benefit to any specific operating system or another. the memory used by a default Windows 7 install in < 2GB and will in no way impact your server unless you are running hundreds of zones with hundreds of players. EQEmu simply does not take that many resources by itself.

[ghanja]

you can run the server on XP if you want. there is no big benefit to any specific operating system or another. the memory used by a default Windows 7 install in < 2GB and will in no way impact your server unless you are running hundreds of zones with hundreds of players. EQEmu simply does not take that many resources by itself.

Fair enough. I'm curious however, if you're aware of any particular reasons why I would want Server 2008 to run on server hardware. If Windows 7 Pro will support dual xeon's and the p400 raid controller, for EQEMU purposes (only) is there a true benefit to running 2008? The price difference is huge as you know, so, if I could "get away" with running Win 7 Pro on this HP server, I'm all for it. I simply don't know the differences between the two OS's in terms of optimization and such.

Let's assume I have as many zones as my RAM in this server would allow up and running, lets say 200 zones and there are 300 accounts/characters logged in.

Do you think there would be a benefit to Windows Server 2008 then, over Win 7 Pro? From what I can google, Win 7 will support all the hardware in this HP server (bios, raid controller, north/south bridge, dual xeons, nics, etc.). Surely there has to be a reason why people shell out $700+ for W2k8, then again, those aren't typically none business/enterprise type of settings. <shrug>

[Maze_EQ]

Do you think there would be a benefit to Windows Server 2008 then, over Win 7 Pro? From what I can google, Win 7 will support all the hardware in this HP server (bios, raid controller, north/south bridge, dual xeons, nics, etc.). Surely there has to be a reason why people shell out $700+ for W2k8, then again, those aren't typically none business/enterprise type of settings. <shrug>

Virtualization support – Server 2008 R2 offers you the ability to run legacy Microsoft OS (i.e Windows XP) in a virtual environment without having to reboot and switch between the two physically. Hyper-V was built for the purpose of running multiple roles (FTP, Web, AD, etc) on a virtual platform to reduce on operating costs. It eliminated the need to run a physical server for each individual role. There is a workaround however. There is great 3rd party tool called VMWare which offers great support and even more benefits such as support for home editions of Windows, Mac support, and 3D acceleration. However your intentions were to use VMWare, Windows 7 could run this same tool as well.

Reduced memory footprint – Windows Server 2008 R2 does not come with those additional features exclusive in Windows 7 (i.e Media Center, Superfetch, etc) so its processes are stripped down and as a result uses less memory.

Remote Access Capabilities – With Server 2008 R2 you can create a VPN tunnel and remotely access your network away from the house.

Security Enforcement – Use group policy to restrict the level of access each user on the computer has access to.



2008 server is just that, a server, it's built around the need to keep alive for long periods of time, using the smallest footprint it can possibly use.

From my experience, I ran an EQ server from Windows 7 on the same box I recently put 2008R2 on, 16gb of ram, i7 8core, solid state blah blah blah.

I noticed with Windows 7 I was running into memory issues, even with 16gb of ram. Had 130 Static zones up, and 40 dynamics ready to go.

Had a population of around 15-20 people for 3 days on average.

Now, Running windows 2008 R2 same specs

I'm running the same 130 static zones, and 40 dynamics.

I've had a constant 25-30 people on.

I'm currently maxing out at 8.5 gb of ram, thats even with Apache, and various other things, such as Teamspeak+Mumble, and misc software all loaded.

If this were Windows 7, which is bloated with useless things a server doesn't need
(media player, multiple useless drivers, whatever you have)
It would be beyond it's stressing point.

To mention, I am also running a loginserver. The database is on a different machine.