Building an Intel Ivy Bridge Desktop System, Part 2

A few weeks ago, I wrote about buying some of the components that I needed to build a new 22nm Ivy Bridge based desktop system. When I wrote that initial blog post, the actual Ivy Bridge desktop processors were not yet available for sale, but that changed on Sunday, April 29. Luckily, we have a Micro Center in Denver, so I was standing at their front door when they opened at 11AM so I could get my new Intel Core i7-3770K processor for $289.99 (which is $40 lower than the price from NewEgg).  I put that processor in my nearly completed system when I got home, and hit the power button to be rewarded by the deafening sound of silence…  There was an LED lit on the motherboard, but no other sign of life. This meant that the power supply was probably good.

At this point, I was a little annoyed. It was not clear whether I had a bad CPU, and bad motherboard, or simply a loose connection somewhere. I was busy with other things the rest of the day, but I was able to start troubleshooting the problem late last night. I had another system with a Core i7-2600K processor in an ASUS P8Z68-V PRO motherboard available, so I decided to do some component swapping to figure out what the problem might be. First, I decided to take the Ivy Bridge processor and put it in the ASUS P8Z68-V PRO motherboard. This worked, which proved that the new processor was fine. Next, I decided to put the older Core i7-2600K processor in the new ASUS Sabertooth Z77 motherboard. This did not work, which put suspicion on the new motherboard. Next, I decided to yank that motherboard out of the case to possibly return it to Micro Center. As I was removing the case fan for the Corsair H80 water cooler for the CPU, I noticed that one of the connectors from the power supply to the motherboard was loose, which was the real source of the problem (it was covered up by the fan and radiator for the CPU cooler). At this point, I decided to keep on removing the new motherboard, since I wanted to use the older ASUS P8Z68-V PRO motherboard in the new Antec 302 case to see how that would work out.

After this thrashing around, I put together all of the parts in the Antec 302 case, and everything worked as expected when I hit the power button. I got Windows 7 installed and patched, and then ran a few quick benchmarks last night. This little system is extremely fast, even using the Intel HD4000 integrated graphics. It only uses 51 watts at idle, while it has 32GB of RAM and a GeekBench score of 13167.  You can take a look at the various screenshots shown below for some more details.

ZDNet’s Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has a blog post entitled Build your own “Ivy Bridge” desktop PC for another perspective on building a more modest system.

 

image

Figure 1: Intel Core i7 3770K processor under load

 

image

Figure 2: Intel Core i7 3770K processor at idle

 

image

Figure 3: Windows Experience Index Scores for Ivy Bridge desktop system

 

image

Figure 4: Mainboard tab from CPU-Z

 

image

Figure 5: Memory tab from CPU-Z

 

image

Figure 6: SPD tab from CPU-Z

 

image

Figure 7: Geekbench 2.3.1 Score for Core i7-3770K System

 

image

Figure 8: CrystalDiskMark scores for 180GB Intel 520 SSD

 

image

Figure 9: CrystalDiskMark scores for 1.5TB WD Black drive

Posted in Computer Hardware, Intel, Ivy Bridge, Processors | Tagged | 5 Comments

Checking Your Main BIOS Version

As some of you may know, I spent four years in the U.S. Marine Corps back during the Reagan administration. I started out as an 0311 Basic Rifleman (aka Grunt) for a couple of years, and then became an 1811 Armor Crewman, ending up as a Tank Commander of an M60A1 Rise/Passive main battle tank. I got out of the Marines as an E-5 Sergeant, and went to college at U.C. Irvine, and the rest is rather ancient history. You might be wondering what my military experience has to do with SQL Server and the importance of checking your main BIOS?

Well, here is the relationship (at least in my mind). It comes from attention to detail, which is a very important characteristic for a good DBA. One thing that the Marines liked to do periodically was have a formal personnel inspection of a everyone in a small unit, such as a Rifle platoon. Depending on who the inspecting officer was, this might cause anywhere from hours to weeks of preparation by the members of the unit, doing things like thoroughly cleaning your weapon, cleaning and properly marking all of the items of your uniform and web gear, clipping off loose threads on your uniform (known as “Irish pennants” or “Russian ropes”), and all manner of other little things to get completely “squared away” in the Marine Corps vernacular.  After all of this extensive preparation, the formal inspection would finally occur, often taking several hours for a platoon of 42 people.

Everyone in the platoon would be standing at attention in formation, and the inspecting officer would go one by one, down the ranks of the formation doing his formal inspection. He would turn to face you, and you would have to do an Inspection Arms movement with your rifle for him. After you were done, he would slap the weapon out of your hands, and start looking at it in excruciating detail, while asking you questions like “What is the maximum effective range of this weapon?”, or “Who is your regimental commander?”. Woe to the Marine who did not know the answer to these questions! One thing that I saw a number of times during these types of inspections was when the inspecting officer found some obvious problem with the Marine that he was inspecting, something that was literally in plain view, but had been missed by everyone during all of the preparations and pre-inspections. For example, maybe one of the buttons on a pocket flap of your utilities was not buttoned, or maybe there was a long, loose thread on  a seam of one of your chest pockets. If the inspecting officer found something obvious like this, they would sometimes literally start undressing the Marine, looking for other violations that were sure to be found under the surface!  The inspecting officer’s zeal and attention to detail was always rewarded in a case like this, since if something so obvious was missed, there would be many other things that were wrong, hidden under the surface…

This is where I get back to SQL Server and the importance of doing the obvious things like checking the main BIOS version on your database servers. As I discussed recently, it is pretty easy and pretty important to periodically check the version of your main system BIOS for a machine, using tools like msinfo32.exe, CPU-Z, or management tools like Dell Open Systems Management Administrator (OMSA).  The large system vendors like Dell, HP, IBM, etc. will release new versions of the main system BIOS to fix problems that are discovered with that model server.  As a DBA, I think it is very important to keep tabs on this, even if someone else (such as a systems administrator) is actually responsible for maintaining your database servers. One reason is that if you ever have a hardware problem and you call your system vendor for support, they are going to want you to run a utility that will check the versions of your main system BIOS, any other firmware, and your hardware driver versions. If any of these are out of date, they will want you to update them. If there was a hardware problem that caused an outage, the fact that the hardware had old versions of the main BIOS or other firmware will also tend to focus some blame on whoever was supposed to maintain that hardware.

The other reason why this is important is that it shows that someone in your organization (hopefully you) is paying attention to the obvious details. Almost invariably, when I have looked at someone’s system after they have asked me for help, and I find that they are running a main system BIOS that is multiple versions out of date, that means that I will find numerous other problems with their system and database configuration. It is really a pretty reliable predictor of trouble! 

There are several reasons why people don’t maintain their database hardware properly. First, they may not know any better, since they may not know that you actually have to maintain this type of thing. Second, they may be afraid of breaking something. What happens if you update your system BIOS, and then the server refuses to POST or boot afterwards? Third, they may just be lazy. After all the server seems to be running fine, why should I stick my neck out and have to flash the BIOS at 11PM on Friday night? Fourth, they may not have a good, tested HA solution in place for that database server, so doing something like flashing the BIOS will cause a relatively long outage because of a reboot. Perhaps they are unsure whether their applications will continue to work after failing over their database(s) to a mirror instance.

I would argue that a good DBA will find a way around all of these objections and fears, and put a regular maintenance program into place for your database servers. This forces you to think about your HA solution and to actually test it on a fairly regular basis. If you have an HA technology in place, such as failover clustering, database mirroring, or SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn, you can do rolling upgrades to minimize your downtime during maintenance. With some testing and planning, you can combine BIOS updates, firmware updates, Windows Updates, and SQL Server Updates all in one maintenance window with minimal downtime. Planning this effort and then actually doing it on a regular basis, forces you and your organization to exercise your HA solution while you keep your systems up to date (which I think will reduce the number of problems you run in to in the future).  This is far better than just avoiding the whole issue, and leaving your database servers running the original versions of everything on a permanent basis. Don’t be afraid!

Posted in Computer Hardware, Dell, Laptops | Tagged , , | 11 Comments

SQL Server 2008 Diagnostic Information Queries (May 2012)

Since tomorrow is May 1, I think it is time to publish the latest set of SQL Server 2008 Diagnostic Information Queries. This version works on SQL Server 2008 and SQL Server 2008 R2. There are a few queries that only work with SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1, but they are noted in the comments.

Many of these queries are DMV queries that require VIEW SERVER STATE permission. Make sure to read the instructions before you run each query. You really should run these queries one at a time, and take a few moments to look at each set of results, rather than running them in a single batch. Much of the value of these diagnostic queries is in the result interpretation comments after each query.

I have fixed a few minor issues with this version, and added several new queries. Please let me know what you think!

Posted in SQL Server 2008, SQL Server 2008 R2 | Tagged , | 13 Comments

SQL Server 2012 Diagnostic Information Queries (April 2012)

It is hard to believe, but SQL Server 2012 has been GA for nearly a month now. Because of this, I thought it was a good time to release an updated version of my SQL Server 2012 Diagnostic Information Queries. These queries are meant to be used with SQL Server 2012, but many of them will also work with SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1 or later. There are a few breaking changes in some of the DMVs between SQL Server 2008/2008 R2 and SQL Server 2012. Some of the queries in this set will also work with older versions of SQL Server.

There are a number of new and revised queries in this version. There also are some additional comments on how to interpret the results of the queries, plus some changes in the order of the queries. I also did some minor cleanup of several of the queries. As always, you will need VIEW SERVER STATE permission to run most of these queries. I recommend that you run them one at a time, after reading the directions and interpretation comments.

Finally, in case you were not aware, Microsoft has already released SQL Server 2012 RTM CU1, which I strongly recommend you get applied for any new SQL Server 2012 deployment that you may be working on.

Posted in SQL Server 2012, SQL Server Denali | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Quick Roundup of Intel Ivy Bridge Reviews

The overall opinion seems to be that the 22nm Ivy Bridge represents a relatively small boost to CPU performance (typically 5-20% compared to the 32nmSandy Bridge, depending on the task), a pretty significant boost to integrated graphics performance (typically 40-65% compared to Sandy Bridge), and reduced power consumption under load (around 15-20% compared to Sandy Bridge). Since Ivy Bridge is only a Tick+ release, this is pretty much what we expected. The Ivy Bridge also seems to have a little less overclocking headroom compared to Sandy Bridge, which is mainly important to desktop hardware enthusiasts.  The first wave of Ivy Bridge processors are the high end quad-core (plus hyper threading) Core i7 parts, with the more mainstream Core i5 and Core i3 parts due out in June.

If you already have a decent Sandy Bridge system, it is harder to make the case for an upgrade to an Ivy Bridge system. If you have something older, like a 45nm Core i7, or really anything else that is older than a Sandy Bridge, then an Ivy Bridge system will be a very nice upgrade. The Ivy Bridge processors actually cost slightly less than the equivalent Sandy Bridge processors. Ivy Bridge is pin compatible with Sandy Bridge, so many older Sandy Bridge motherboards will work with Ivy Bridge, after a BIOS update. You can also use a Sandy Bridge in a new 7-series chipset motherboard, although I am not sure why you would want to.

Here are some links to some of the reviews that were published today:

AnandTech: The Intel Ivy Bridge (Core i7 3770K) Review

Tom’s Hardware: Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up For Ivy Bridge

HardOCP: Intel Ivy Bridge Processor IPC and Overclocking Review

Overclocker’s Club: Intel Third Generation Core i7 3770K Review

The Guru of 3D: Core i7 3770K and 3750 review with Z77

Posted in Computer Hardware, Intel, Ivy Bridge, Processors | Tagged | Leave a comment

Intel Ivy Bridge Release Coverage

Web sites, blogs and media outlets in Europe and the U.K. are starting to post some early Ivy Bridge stories, which means that the Intel information embargo about the Ivy Bridge processor must be nearly about to expire. From what I have been able to determine, the information embargo is actually set to expire at 5PM UTC time, which would be 10AM here in Colorado. Once the embargo expires, there should be lots of more detailed stories with benchmark results. In the meantime, here are some links to these early stories.

PC Advisor: Intel launches Ivy Bridge processors

PC Advisor: Intel Ivy Bridge processors tested

PC Pro: Intel launches Ivy Bridge chips 

Apple Insider: Intel launches next-gen Ivy Bridge processors with 3D transistors

Daily Mirror: Intel’s Ivy Bridge chips launch using ‘3D transistors’

BBC News: Intel’s Ivy Bridge chips launch using ‘3D transistors’

Time: Intel’s Ivy Bridge Processors Launch at Last — How Do They Perform?

Posted in Computer Hardware, Intel, Ivy Bridge, Processors | Tagged | 1 Comment

SQL Server 2012 Core Factor Table for AMD Processors

As of April 1, 2012, Microsoft has a new SQL Server 2012 Core Factor Table for AMD processors. You can download it here (PDF warning). The complete SQL Server 2012 Licensing Overview is here. The most relevant part of this table regards the newer AMD 31XX, 32XX, 41XX, 42XX, 61XX, 62XX Series Processors with 6 or more cores, that have a core factor of 0.75. This means that AMD cores are somewhat more affordable for SQL Server 2012.

Back in January 2012, I talked about a new Hewlett Packard TPC-E benchmark submission that showed a 1,232.84 TpsE score for a two socket, 32 physical core AMD system, compared to a 1284.14 TpsE  score for a two socket, 12 physical core Intel system. Both of these TPC-E benchmark submissions were on SQL Server 2008 R2.  Back then, I pointed out how you would be paying 2.66 times as much for SQL Server 2012 Enterprise Edition licenses for the AMD system compared to the Intel system (32 physical cores vs. 12 physical cores).

Now, with the SQL Server 2012 Core Factor Table, you would only be paying twice as much for SQL Server 2012 Enterprise Edition licenses for the AMD system compared to the Intel system (32 physical cores times 0.75 vs. 12 physical cores). That is a slightly better story for AMD, but it is still a pretty hard sell. Based on the TPC-E benchmark results, both the older Intel Xeon X5600 Westmere-EP series and the new Intel Xeon E5-2600 Sandy Bridge-EP series do much better per physical core on OLTP workloads than the latest AMD Opteron 6200 series processors. These Intel processors simply have significantly better single-threaded performance, which is very important for OLTP workloads.

I really hope that AMD can do better with the upcoming Piledriver core based Opteron series in 2013.

Posted in AMD, Computer Hardware, Processors, SQL Server 2012 | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Urgent BIOS Update for Dell PowerEdge R810, R910 and M910 Servers

If you have an 11th generation Dell PowerEdge R810 , PowerEdge R910 server, or a PowerEdge M910 blade server, there is a pretty recent (April 9, 2012) Urgent update to version 2.7.0 for the main system BIOS. Here is Dell’s description of the update:

Dell highly recommends applying this update as soon as possible. The update contains changes to improve the reliability and availability of your Dell system.

This BIOS release resolves the potential for unpredictable system behavior in Dell systems running Intel(R) Xeon(R) Processor E7-2800/4800/8800 Series. For systems running Intel(R) Xeon(R) Processor E7-2800/4800/8800 Series, Dell strongly recommends applying this critical update as soon as possible. Systems updated with this version of BIOS or newer and running Intel(R) Xeon(R) Processor E7-2800/4800/8800 Series will be blocked from flashing to BIOS versions earlier than 2.7.0.

Here is the download link for the R810,  here is the download link for the R910, and here is the download link for the M910.

Update on April 19: I forgot about the M910, which I have added to the post.

You can use Dell OMSA, msinfo32.exe, or CPU-Z to discover the version of your main system BIOS. For example, Figure 1 shows the BIOS Version/Date of the little desktop system I am writing this on. Figure 2 shows the Mainboard tab of CPU-Z.

 

image

Figure 1: msinfo32.exe Output

 

image

Figure 2: CPU-Z Mainboard tab

 

If you discover that you are on an older version, I think you should strongly consider scheduling a maintenance window so that you can get this new version installed on your servers. Updating your main system BIOS will require a reboot of the system. If you have an HA solution in place, such as failover clustering, database mirroring, or SQL Server 2012 AlwaysOn Availability Groups, you can do a rolling upgrade to minimize your downtime.

Posted in Computer Hardware, Dell | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Windows Server 2012

Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President Brad Anderson announced today at the Microsoft Management Summit 2012 in Las Vegas that the next version of Windows Server will be called Windows Server 2012. Windows Server 2012 shares a common code base with Windows 8 (which is the client version of the OS). You can read more about what is going into Windows 8 on the Building Windows 8 blog, which tends to focus more on client-side innovations, but there have been a number of posts that focus more on the server side, such as this one.

Posted in Windows Server 2012 | Tagged | Leave a comment

SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1 CU6 Released

This morning, Microsoft released SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1 CU6, which is Build 10.50.2811.0. This Cumulative Update lists 20 fixes in the public fix list. Remember, this CU is only for SQL Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1.

Of particular interest to me is a fix for Error 18056, State 29, which is an issue that I have encountered at both NewsGator and at Avalara. Over the past three years, I opened three Connect items about the issue, and opened three CSS cases, but unfortunately never really got the issue 100% resolved. I freely admit that this is an intermittent, complex issue that would be very difficult to debug and resolve, and I appreciate the efforts of everyone at Microsoft who helped work on this over the years. I also want to thank Aaron Bertrand (blog|twitter) for helping to focus attention on this issue.

One caveat I want to throw out is that there are many reasons you might get Error 18056, with various different State numbers. This fix is targeted at Error 18056, State 29 only, and it is not guaranteed to fix that issue in every single situation. If you have been seeing Error 18056, State 29, I would definitely get SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1 CU6 installed and see if that helps. If it does not help, then you should open a Connect item, and then open a support case with Microsoft CSS.

Posted in SQL Server 2008 R2 | Tagged , | Leave a comment