This post is more than 5 years old
6 Posts
0
19848
T610 - 6GB is NOT sufficient!
I bought this a few years ago, and it seemed OK initially...
After restarting it's used perhaps 3.5GB. After a bit of time it's up to something near 5.8GB and lagging significantly.
This is the memory which my profile shows is installed:
> DUAL IN-LINE MEMORY MODULE, 2G, 1333, 2RX8X72, 8, 240, UBE
Processor (1):
> E5520, 2.26/5.86, 8MB, XDN, D0
Obviously, three of those.
I'm thinking that bringing it up to double or triple that would give me some headroom. I"m running SBS2008, and not much else except a dental practice management program.
The memory was "unbuffered", but I really have no idea why that was picked for the install.
Is it better to add memory to what I've got (would have to be the same?) or take it out and go with perhaps 3x8GB's ?? Buffered.. unbuffered???
Does it matter if it's DELL memory??
THANKS
theflash1932
7 Technologist
7 Technologist
•
16.3K Posts
0
July 2nd, 2014 12:00
You can use EITHER buffered/registered (RDIMM) or unbuffered (UDIMM), but you cannot mix them. So, if you want to move from UDIMM's to RDIMM's, you will have to replace all existing memory with RDIMM's. If you choose to stick with your UDIMM's, then know that 2GB is the largest UDIMM you can use. If you want/need to use larger DIMM's, then you will have to replace the memory with RDIMM's.
Do you have one processor or two?
If one processor, then you can only use 6 DIMM's, giving you a max of 12GB if using UDIMM's. If you have two processors, you can put 2GB in each slot, giving you 24GB total.
It doesn't have to be "Dell" memory, but it does have to meet certain criteria. If you don't purchase from Dell or someplace like Crucial that tells you what you need and guarantees compatibility, then make sure you review the population guidelines (page 30):
http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pedge/en/server-poweredge-t610-tech-guidebook.pdf
theflash1932
7 Technologist
7 Technologist
•
16.3K Posts
0
July 2nd, 2014 12:00
UDIMM's are usually slightly faster when using only small amounts of RAM (1-3 sticks), but the more you have populated, the more RDIMM's will outperform UDIMM's. The capacity limitation on UDIMM's is the biggest thing. One might argue that the amount spent on UDIMM's if the server EVER needs upgrading beyond the UDIMM capacity limits is a complete waste, as you then have to repurchase all new RDIMM's, and it would have been better to start with RDIMM's and simply add to the configuration.
This is very subjective and depends on the server's use. For a system intended to run 20 virtual machines, VDI, or Exchange, it is very "lean" (unacceptable, really). For a web server or small office file server, it "could" be just fine. Just depends on how it's used.
Gatrnol
6 Posts
0
July 2nd, 2014 12:00
Thanks for the reply - yes, it's just one processor.
Is there any difference (other than obviously the 2GB limit on UDIMM's) between the two types of memory -- either cost or performance?
Is 6GB generally considered a bit too lean in the RAM dept for the T610?
THANKS
Gatrnol
6 Posts
0
July 12th, 2014 12:00
So - I just installed 24 GB (3*8) without issue.
My question is now... why is my server so memory hungry?
Before (w/6 GB) it would push 5.8+GB used - and have definitely lag issues.
Now, with 24 GB, it started out using around 5.3. Within 30 minutes, it was up to 6 GB. I come back now, after 3-4 hours, and it's up to 7.7 GB used. At least that only represents about 1/3 of the total available, I just wonder if it's not going to continue to gobble it up.
Here's an image I took of the most recent usage:
Is this considered "normal", and should I just not worry about it?
THANKS
theflash1932
7 Technologist
7 Technologist
•
16.3K Posts
0
July 12th, 2014 19:00
Windows will use more than it needs if it is available - not 24GB just for Windows, but SQL and Exchange will pretty much use as much as they can get.
skylarking
548 Posts
0
July 13th, 2014 03:00
Gatronl, i'm curious if your original concerns related to your system "lagging significantly" has been resolved by increasing your system RAM?
I don't think i can help you with any SQL or exchange optimization. I'm simply curious if RAM solved your initial concern :)
Gatrnol
6 Posts
0
July 13th, 2014 07:00
From a couple of things I've seen, I'd have to say yes. Where it might have taken 30 seconds previously to accomplish a task (turning a database off, then on again), it now is easily half of that.
I wish I had timed some of these things previously!