Epicor 9 Hardware Requirements

Yahoo Archive
1
We are running 8 core, 3.2ghz Xeon, 20GB RAM, Windows 2003.

All PCs are a minimum or dual core, 4GB, XP.

When we had the older PCs opening pages on E9 was slower.


Overall though, compared to our legacy system (which ran like lightning on a single Xeon 3.2GHz with 2GB RAM), Epicor 9 is painfully slow.

In E9 you have to wait for screens to open. Our legacy system was instant.

In E9 you have to wait ages for searches to return results. Our legacy system was instant.

In E9 you have to wait ages for something to print. Our legacy system was instant.


Apart from the speed, and a lot of niggles in the Financial side of the software, E9 is a superior product to our legacy system - I just wish is was faster and the overhead for the servers/PCs didnt have to be so great!



________________________________
From: Robert Gogola <rgogola@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 30 June, 2010 18:50:16
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 9 Hardware Requirements

Â
We do have one of those "high-hardware" servers to host Epicor 9
exclusively. 4 quad-core, 32MB of RAM...sounds like a jetski when it
starts up. That being said, overall performance, processing and page
loads have improved...despite going from 8.01 directly to 9. We do have
some users on older PCs and there are instances when having a new,
dual-core processor made a difference for specific user workload. Those
new PC happen to have 4GB of RAM, but not rushing to update every user
to the 4GB threshold.

I use some VMWare, personally, and experience some delay inherent to
Virtualization. Maybe it is just me, but I perceive performance in
display when using Virtual Machines. Notice that I mentioned "display".
Perhaps the processing is just as fast as without virtualization, but it
appears slower on my systems. BTW, my desktop is as fast as the server
that you described, but with 6GB of RAM. Hope that this offers some
perspective on the matter.

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of scottbrydson
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 11:05 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 9 Hardware Requirements

Mike,

We are now in the process of implementing Epicor 9.04.5 and have a
similar # of users. We have a relatively modest number of test
transactions with 9,500 parts. We were also surprised by the high
hardware requirements.

We are in a VMWare environment which Epicor had no experience with. The
virtual machine is using a 3Ghz quad-core processor, 12GB of RAM,
running on a RAID-10 array. We have 64 bit MS SQL 2003. The network here
is small but properly segmented with new cat-6 cabling.

Our experience has seen generally poor to average performance. Logins
and routine page loads are often sluggish up to 30 seconds. Our sister
companies in the UK report some MRP process calcs can take 12 hours
plus. Before we go live next month, we plan to have an Epicor consultant
review the configs and hopefully optimize what can be improved.

We were told that Epicor v9 was a complete rewrite in the .NET world. It
looks to be a pig, which is why EPicor recommends throwing boatloads of
hardware horsepower at it. Client PC's with less than 4gb of RAM were
problematic, often freezing, so we've purchased new machines for the
power users.

Hope this helps, we can share additonal information and metrics as we go
through optimization but my advice would be not to skimp.

Regards,
Scott Brydson
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mike" <mf.zonereed@...> wrote:
>
> I've just received a copy of Epicor's recommended hardware
requirements, and it's much higher than I was anticipating. We have less
than 20 users do we really need 2 Xeon Quadcores?
>
> If anyone is running Epicor 9, please let me know what your hardware
setup looks like.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
I've just received a copy of Epicor's recommended hardware requirements, and it's much higher than I was anticipating. We have less than 20 users do we really need 2 Xeon Quadcores?

If anyone is running Epicor 9, please let me know what your hardware setup looks like.


Thanks,
Mike
3
Mike,

We are now in the process of implementing Epicor 9.04.5 and have a similar # of users. We have a relatively modest number of test transactions with 9,500 parts. We were also surprised by the high hardware requirements.

We are in a VMWare environment which Epicor had no experience with. The virtual machine is using a 3Ghz quad-core processor, 12GB of RAM, running on a RAID-10 array. We have 64 bit MS SQL 2003. The network here is small but properly segmented with new cat-6 cabling.

Our experience has seen generally poor to average performance. Logins and routine page loads are often sluggish up to 30 seconds. Our sister companies in the UK report some MRP process calcs can take 12 hours plus. Before we go live next month, we plan to have an Epicor consultant review the configs and hopefully optimize what can be improved.

We were told that Epicor v9 was a complete rewrite in the .NET world. It looks to be a pig, which is why EPicor recommends throwing boatloads of hardware horsepower at it. Client PC's with less than 4gb of RAM were problematic, often freezing, so we've purchased new machines for the power users.

Hope this helps, we can share additonal information and metrics as we go through optimization but my advice would be not to skimp.

Regards,
Scott Brydson
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mf.zonereed@...> wrote:
>
> I've just received a copy of Epicor's recommended hardware requirements, and it's much higher than I was anticipating. We have less than 20 users do we really need 2 Xeon Quadcores?
>
> If anyone is running Epicor 9, please let me know what your hardware setup looks like.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
4
We do have one of those "high-hardware" servers to host Epicor 9
exclusively. 4 quad-core, 32MB of RAM...sounds like a jetski when it
starts up. That being said, overall performance, processing and page
loads have improved...despite going from 8.01 directly to 9. We do have
some users on older PCs and there are instances when having a new,
dual-core processor made a difference for specific user workload. Those
new PC happen to have 4GB of RAM, but not rushing to update every user
to the 4GB threshold.



I use some VMWare, personally, and experience some delay inherent to
Virtualization. Maybe it is just me, but I perceive performance in
display when using Virtual Machines. Notice that I mentioned "display".
Perhaps the processing is just as fast as without virtualization, but it
appears slower on my systems. BTW, my desktop is as fast as the server
that you described, but with 6GB of RAM. Hope that this offers some
perspective on the matter.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of scottbrydson
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 11:05 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 9 Hardware Requirements





Mike,

We are now in the process of implementing Epicor 9.04.5 and have a
similar # of users. We have a relatively modest number of test
transactions with 9,500 parts. We were also surprised by the high
hardware requirements.

We are in a VMWare environment which Epicor had no experience with. The
virtual machine is using a 3Ghz quad-core processor, 12GB of RAM,
running on a RAID-10 array. We have 64 bit MS SQL 2003. The network here
is small but properly segmented with new cat-6 cabling.

Our experience has seen generally poor to average performance. Logins
and routine page loads are often sluggish up to 30 seconds. Our sister
companies in the UK report some MRP process calcs can take 12 hours
plus. Before we go live next month, we plan to have an Epicor consultant
review the configs and hopefully optimize what can be improved.

We were told that Epicor v9 was a complete rewrite in the .NET world. It
looks to be a pig, which is why EPicor recommends throwing boatloads of
hardware horsepower at it. Client PC's with less than 4gb of RAM were
problematic, often freezing, so we've purchased new machines for the
power users.

Hope this helps, we can share additonal information and metrics as we go
through optimization but my advice would be not to skimp.

Regards,
Scott Brydson
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mike" <mf.zonereed@...> wrote:
>
> I've just received a copy of Epicor's recommended hardware
requirements, and it's much higher than I was anticipating. We have less
than 20 users do we really need 2 Xeon Quadcores?
>
> If anyone is running Epicor 9, please let me know what your hardware
setup looks like.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
Actually, we have a VM Machine similar to yours...however, the Epicor
server is much more beefy and doesn't share resources. In my experience
watching Epicor upgrade and seeing delay in load times on our previous
server....hardware makes a difference. About the difference you'd see
with XP on a Pentium 3 with 512MB of RAM...versus a duo-core with 2GB of
RAM. How much delay can you routinely afford for each of your users? An
extra minute to 5 minutes? That is indicative of the ratio you'll be
achieving when pushing the envelope with your hardware. The system is
just going to get bigger and have more to process 5 yrs. down the road.



Consider adding no less than a dedicated server with 2 quad core and
16GB of RAM.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of scottbrydson
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 11:05 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Epicor 9 Hardware Requirements





Mike,

We are now in the process of implementing Epicor 9.04.5 and have a
similar # of users. We have a relatively modest number of test
transactions with 9,500 parts. We were also surprised by the high
hardware requirements.

We are in a VMWare environment which Epicor had no experience with. The
virtual machine is using a 3Ghz quad-core processor, 12GB of RAM,
running on a RAID-10 array. We have 64 bit MS SQL 2003. The network here
is small but properly segmented with new cat-6 cabling.

Our experience has seen generally poor to average performance. Logins
and routine page loads are often sluggish up to 30 seconds. Our sister
companies in the UK report some MRP process calcs can take 12 hours
plus. Before we go live next month, we plan to have an Epicor consultant
review the configs and hopefully optimize what can be improved.

We were told that Epicor v9 was a complete rewrite in the .NET world. It
looks to be a pig, which is why EPicor recommends throwing boatloads of
hardware horsepower at it. Client PC's with less than 4gb of RAM were
problematic, often freezing, so we've purchased new machines for the
power users.

Hope this helps, we can share additonal information and metrics as we go
through optimization but my advice would be not to skimp.

Regards,
Scott Brydson
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mike" <mf.zonereed@...> wrote:
>
> I've just received a copy of Epicor's recommended hardware
requirements, and it's much higher than I was anticipating. We have less
than 20 users do we really need 2 Xeon Quadcores?
>
> If anyone is running Epicor 9, please let me know what your hardware
setup looks like.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]