Windows Server 2008 “Workstation” Take 3.

The more I thought about using Win 2k8 server as my workstation OS, the more I liked the idea. I did initially have a problem with Battlefield2 locking up and then crashing to the desktop, but I eventually worked through that (details below).

I decided to do some benchmarks for you folks while I was experimenting. I went through three separate OS installs to do these, so there would be nothing to influence the scores (such as where the OS’s partitions would lie on the HDD), and I’m no professional benchmarker, so these are really only benchmarks that are relevant to me, my setup and my applications, but here goes for those who are interested!

First, I’ll recap my hardware:

AMD Athlon 64 x2 4600+ @ 2.4GHz

6 GB DDR2 800 PC6400 RAM (Crucial Ballistix 2×2GB + 2×1GB)

Main HDD: Western Digital WD3200AAKS 320 GB, 16MB Cache SATAII

First Secondary HDD: Seagate ST3120814A (7200.9) 120 GB 8MB Cache EIDE (Data only)

Second Secondary HDD: Western Digital WD2500BB 250GB 2MB Cache EIDE (Data and Virtuals)

  • Side note: Even though the WD2500BB by all accounts should be slower than the Seagate, I use it for my virtual storage space since it has ALWAYS benchmarked faster than the Seagate for me (even if by a small margin).

Video Card: PNY Nvidia 7900GS 256MB PCI-E (Overclocked to 500 Core/700 MEM)

Motherboard/Chipset: Biostar TF570SLI/Nvidia Nforce 570SLi

Power Supply: Antec Neopower 650 – 650W

Operating Systems:

  1. Windows XP Professional x64 Edition SP2
  2. Windows Vista Ultimate x64 Edition SP1
  3. Windows Server 2008 Enterprise x64 Edition SP1 (BTW, is this the first time MS has released an OS already at SP1?)

On XP x64, I ran all updates, updated drivers to latest versions, otherwise stock config (XP Themes on).

On Vista, I ran all updates, disabled UAC, Indexing/Search, Media Center, and the Sidebar (Used Vista Aero theme) and updated all drivers to latest versions.

On Server 2008 I installed the Desktop Experience package, Changed Processor Scheduling, Enabled SuperFetch, Enabled Sound, Enabled Themes (Used Vista Aero) and updated drivers to latest version.

Now for the Benchmarks:

3DMark 2006 – Standard setup, just installed and ran.

  • Windows XP x64 = 5789 3D Marks
  • Windows Vista x64 = 5541 3D Marks
  • Windows Server 2008 x64 = 5990 3D Marks

HD Tune on Main HDD (The WD SATA)

  • Windows XP x64: Maximum Transfer = 69.8 MB/sec; Burst Rate = 96.2 MB/sec
  • Windows Vista x64: Maximum Transfer = 71.1 MB/sec; Burst Rate = 110.7 MB/sec
  • Windows Server 2008 x64: Maximum Transfer = 75.6 MB/sec; Burst Rate = 114.3 MB/sec

Cinebench 9.5 (64-Bit Edition); Multiple CPU Rendering:

  • Windows XP x64 = 742
  • Windows Vista x64 = 745
  • Windows Server 2008 x64 = 747

Half-Life2: Lost Cost (Video Stress Test No AA no AF – defaults for my card @ 1280×1024):

  • Windows XP x64 = 127.56 Avg. FPS
  • Windows Vista x64 = 85.25 Avg. FPS
  • Windows Server 2008 = 115.51 Avg. FPS

Counter Strike Source (Video Stress Test – 4xAA no AF – defaults for my card @ 1280×1024):

  • Windows XP x64 = 139.65 Avg. FPS
  • Windows Vista x64 = 111.42 Avg. FPS
  • Windows Server 2008 x64 = 121.94 Avg. FPS

Battlefield 2 (High settings on everything @ 1280×1024):

  • Windows XP x64 = 95.2 FPS
  • Windows Vista x64 = 80.1 FPS
  • Windows Server 2008 x64 = 94.4 FPS

As I reported before, I had problems with Battlefield2 running under Server 2k8 – My sound would stutter, and then the game would lock, and eventually crash to the desktop. I discovered a trick to set up the sound system the same way it is on Vista. Look up this reg key:

HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Multimedia\SystemProfile

and change the value of SystemResponsiveness from 100 to 20.

VMware Workstation 6 (Vista x64 Ultimate as Guest OS -  Guest has 2GB RAM and 1 CPU: WEI Scores):

  • Windows XP x64: CPU = 4.4; Mem = 5.6; HDD = 5.2
  • Windows Vista x64: CPU = 4.5; Mem = 5.7; HDD = 5.3
  • Windows Server 2008 x64: CPU = 4.5; Mem = 5.9; HDD = 5.3

I did not include the Graphics scores as they were obviously 1.0 across the board due to running in VMware. As a point of reference, my machine gets a bare metal score of 5.0 on CPU, 5.9 on RAM and a 5.7 on HDD  under Vista x64 (CPU higher mostly due to 2x CPU probably).

VMWare Workstation 6 (Ubuntu 8.04 as Guest OS – Guest has 2GB Ram and 1 CPU – results of hdparm -tT /dev/sda1):

  • Windows XP x64 = Timed cache reads = 874.32 MB/sec; Timed buffered disk reads: 38.57 MB/sec
  • Windows Vista x64 = Timed cache reads = 894.41 MB/sec; Timed buffered disk reads: 40.21 MB/sec
  • Windows Server 2008 x64 = Timed cache reads = 978.39 MB/sec; Timed buffered disk reads: 45.83 MB/sec

For the Ubuntu guest, VMware paravirtual kernel support is enabled as Ubuntu supports it since 7.04 (Feistly).

For all VM’s, I have VMware set to fit all virtual machine memory into reserved host RAM.

Conclusions and Closing Thoughts:

I am not sure why Server 2008 performs so differently than Vista. I have read a lot of blog posts around 2008 as a workstation over the last few days, and I’ve seen people be downright rude and call people liars. Folks are saying that there should be no difference since they are basically the same OS underneath, and if you disable all the “vista” eyecandy it’ll even out. With my tests, I had the “eyecandy” set dead even. I can not explain why there is a difference, but there is a difference, if you don’t believe me, try it for yourself. Even more striking than the benchmarked differences the OS just “feels” so much faster and smoother than Vista, and much more solid – although, that could very well be some sort of placebo effect, and I fully admit that.

For me, however I think the winner for my HDD space is going to be Server 2008 – until something else convinces me otherwise. Again, I stress these were not “scientific benchmarks” in a 100% controlled environment, and I did them originally, strictly as my own point of reference to use in making my decision. Please take the results with a grain of salt, and know that your results may differ dramatically!

If you’ve made it this far: Thanks for reading!  ;-)

9 Responses

  1. [...] Jerry Blackburn wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptThe more I thought about using Win 2k8 server as my workstation OS, the more I liked the idea. I did initially have a problem with Battlefield2 locking up and then crashing to the desktop, but I eventually worked through that (details … [...]

  2. [...] jaysonrowe wrote an interesting post today on Windows Server 2008 âWorkstationâ Take 3.Here’s a quick excerptWindows XP Professional x64 Edition SP2; Windows Vista Ultimate x64 Edition SP1; Windows Server 2008 Enterprise x64 Edition SP1 (BTW, is this the first time MS has released an OS already at SP1?) On XP x64, I ran all updates, … [...]

  3. Why not use XP 64 bit? It seemed faster in some of the areas, and not that far behind in others. Also, the world revolves on XP. Just a quick question. My only confusion is the lower 3D Mark score but better FPS through every game? Why is that, and is FPS just a neat meter,but has no real value to game rendering?

  4. Rook – even though I answered you off-channel on the merc forum, I’ll post my response here too:

    I’m not sure about the 3D mark question – Looking at the score breakdown, makes the scores seem really more similar than they appear looking at the final 3D mark score – Server 2008 got higher scores on the CPU mark portion of the test than either XP x64 or Vista…

    As for the games, again – not sure – just posting results And again, the benchmarks weren’t run in a pure controlled environment like TomHardware, Anandtech, ExtremeTech and other sites like them do…so some of it could have been inconsistencies on my part.

    After seeing your response I should probably post a follow up to my other readers (and probably will), but a lot of it comes down to how the OS “feels” which is something that can’t be benchmarked. ESPECIALLY now that Server 2008 has been up and running on my machine a few days and SuperFetch has kicked in, it feels SOOOO much faster than XP x64 it isn’t funny – apps load instantly (even Office 2007 apps, which are notoriously slow to load) – also the areas where Server 2008 did VERY well for me is CPU utilization (seems to multi-thread better than either of the other two) and I/O performance. Also, Server 2008 (and Vista for that matter) do a better job of utilizing a large amount of RAM that goes largely un-utilized on XP x64 UNLESS I’m running a Virtual.

    Plus, Server 2008 is hands down the best platform I’ve run VMware Workstation on yet – virtual machines suspend and resume VERY fast, and Linux distro’s like Ubuntu and others that have VMware’s VMI paravirtualization built into the kernel pretty much run at full bare metal speed. I probably have 30 Virtual machines on my PC right now – I know I have win 2k server, win 2k3 server, win 2k8 server, XP x64, Vista x64, Solaris, BSD, Ubuntu, and almost every other major Linux distro out there. It’s something I play with… a LOT!I even have a CentOS (Red Hat Enterprise Linux “free” Clone) VMware virtual running with the Xen Kernel, and I have Virtual Machines running in Xen on that VMware Virtual machine – now that’s DEEP VMWare is the main reason I have 6GB of RAM in my machine.

    Anyway – like I said, it works better for me, in my situation. If you have a chance, and can get your hands on Server 2008, try it out, but XP x64 or even Vista x64 may work out better for ya. They are a little less work to get set up as you have to “add” stuff to Server 2008 to make it a “Workstation” OS – but hey, I’ve ran Linux on my main machine almost exclusively for the last 2 years up until I started trying out Server 2008, so I’m used to “tweaking” to get things just right – it would probably be an entirely different ball-game for the “average Windows user”. For ME, adding the little bit of extra stuff, to Server 2008, tweaking the scheduling, and stuff was LESS work than turning crap off in Vista, and it is STILL faster

    WOW That wound up being a long post

  5. Thanks for the benchmarks! I’ve run both Vista Business x64 and Server 2008 Standard x64, and I’ve found that the server OS is still snappier. Plus, for some reason, I had serious problems almost daily with freeze ups in Vista x64, but they don’t occur in Server08. I’ve got the Desktop Experience w/ Aero and sound running also, and still find it to be snappier. It was nice not having to go into Services in Vista and try to figure out which ones to manually disable to make it run better.

    The other advantage in my opinion of Server is that, unless you specifically choose a new folder template, every folder view, whether Pictures, Music, etc. is the same. I was getting so frustrated with Vista trying to ‘guess’ what folder view to use based on the contents of the folder. I had my Program Files folder and even Windows folder on C:\ displaying details view with Image properties, and there’s no way to ‘Customize’ the view back to the default. No such headaches in Server08, thankfully.

  6. Just wondering, has anyone knowledge whether Server 2008 is “missing” the DRM -components? If so, that might explain the altogether faster experience.

  7. [...] Jayson Rowe’s Ramblings: Windows Server 2008 “Workstation” Take 3 [...]

  8. [...] Jayson Rowe’s Ramblings: Windows Server 2008 “Workstation” Take 3 [...]

Leave a Reply