Yes of course that is an option, in fact he is looking for the MOST powerful dual core existing in the market! But imagine in a couple of years time when you can only choose minimum 8 core servers? -- LSC On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Paul Drake <bdbafh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > LSC, > > So why not simply downgrade to a dual socketed, quad core server? > The new server will still have 3 memory controller channels per socket as > opposed to a single memory controller on the mainboard. > Perhaps I'm too used to where the lines of the electric fence are and > simply stay far enough away to not get zapped. > > Paul > > > <removed most of the thread so as to not get nailed for overquoting> > > > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:36 AM, LS Cheng <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I have a customer who's got 200 users (NAMED USERS) licensed, to simplify >> he has a 4 dual core server so that becomes 8 cores, when dealing with named >> user license model you must pay 25 suer per core so even he has less users >> he has to pay for 200. >> >> He needs to upgrade the server now, 4 core intel 55xx CPU so the hardware >> vendor, Dell is trying to sell a server with 4 CPU again, but now he will >> have 16 cores after hardware upgrade. Oracle tells him that now he needs now >> 400 users licensed. >> >> So he says what the heck, the number of users is not gonna change just >> because the CPU has now more cores I am forced to buy more license? In this >> case he is not annoyed about the cores, the annoying point is Oracle forces >> him to buy 25 users per core even has has around 150 users. >> >> So more cores mean more money no matter if you license with CPU or named >> users. What if in a couple of years all CPU are 16 or even 32 cores, so he >> has to move from 200 users to 800? >> >> >> -- >> LSC >> >> >> >