Three Xeon E5 Server Systems From Intel, Tyan, And Supermicro

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


I agree. Just reduce it a little bit but don't make it too hard to see
 
[citation][nom]TheBigTroll[/nom]no comparison needed. intel usually wins[/citation]
Usually? The E5s absolutely crush AMD's best offerings. AMD's top of the line server chips are about equal in performance to Intel's last generation of chips, which are now more than two years old. It's even more lopsided than Sandy Bridge vs. Bulldozer.
 
[citation][nom]dogman_1234[/nom]Cool. Now, can we compare these to Opteron systems?[/citation]

As an AMD fan, I wish we could. But while Magny-Cours was competitive with the last gen Xeons, AMD doesn't really have anything that stacks up against the E5. In pretty much every workload, E5 dominates the 62xx or the 61xx series by 30-50%. The E5 is even price competitive at this point.

We'll just have to see how Piledriver does.

 
Finally we have some F@H benches!! Thank you!

Having said that I would suggest you include expected PPD for the given TPF since that is what folders look at when deciding on hardware. Or you could just devote 48 hours from each machine to generate actual results for F@H and donate those points to your F@H team (yes Tom's has a team [40051] and visibility is our biggest problem).
 
[citation][nom]lilcinw[/nom]Finally we have some F@H benches!! Thank you!Having said that I would suggest you include expected PPD for the given TPF since that is what folders look at when deciding on hardware. Or you could just devote 48 hours from each machine to generate actual results for F@H and donate those points to your F@H team (yes Tom's has a team [40051] and visibility is our biggest problem).[/citation]
The issue is that other tech sites promote their teams. We do not have a promotive site. Even while mentioning F@H, some people do not agree with it or will never want to participate. It is a mentality. However, it is a choice!
 
I've seen a few 2U 4-node blade servers from Asus and Supermicro running dual-socket E5's - just the thought of populating a single 42U rack with those things makes the mind boggle (168 processors, 1344 cores, 2688 threads, 42TB of total RAM and 1008TB of storage).

F@H on such a monster? Do the math and you'll see that just after one year of 24/7 operation you would rack up over 3 billion points, putting you in the top 10 for teams and no.1 spot for single user.

That's assuming, of course, that you've forked out $20k for your monthly power bill to run that fully-stocked 42U rack and paid $240k to your utility company for the entire year. Then there's the cost of the hardware itself - around $26k for each 2U server, or around a cool $600,000.

SPEND MONEY FAST
 
We need somebody to design new server which is powerful and can handle a lot of memory and harddisk and affordable price.
all powerful server are expensive now.
I believe market for cheap but powerful server are big, and no one is working on this area.
I know the profit is not big, but by big quantity it mean big money too :)
 
Would be cool to test both a E5 Xeon and a Sandybridge-E of the same clock speed, in the same C602 motherboard (Supermicro's X9SRA), to see if DDIO has any performance impact on 3D and GPGPU benchmarks.
 
Also, how about posting measuring the scaling from 1x 4core E5 Xeon -> 1x 8core E5 Xeon -> 2x 4core E5 Xeon?

The point is that memory is directly connected to 1 CPU only. Adding a 2nd CPU doubles aggregate bandwidth, but could actually hurt performance, if the software isn't written to carefully to localize data and manage affinity between threads & CPUs.
 
Why don't you include HP DL series and the Dell R series. Those two companies have about 70% market share on the 2U Inter server market. I don't understand why you would exclude them. Most companies wouldn't buy anything but a Dell, HP or and IBM.
 
[citation][nom]centosfan[/nom]Why don't you include HP DL series and the Dell R series. Those two companies have about 70% market share on the 2U Inter server market. I don't understand why you would exclude them. Most companies wouldn't buy anything but a Dell, HP or and IBM.[/citation]

That is something that we are looking at. This was more of a look at what is out there for barebones kits. I totally agree that these types of comparisons would be great.
 
I've been using Supermicro bare bones servers for a few years now and I love them. When it comes to performance per dollar there's no way to compare these systems with off the shelf dell or HP offerings. I've specced them out 20 ways and the bottom line is I can build nearly 2x the horsepower at significantly lower cost vs. a fully configured server from one of the big vendors. My newest SQL servers are 8xSSD Raid10 data sets and simple sata mirrors for the OS. 128GB RAM, dual, quad-core Xeons, adaptec 6805 controllers. About $5k each for the full build, and their chassis are so easy to work in the whole build takes less than 30 minutes before I'm loading the OS.
 
[citation][nom]utomo88[/nom]We need somebody to design new server which is powerful and can handle a lot of memory and harddisk and affordable price.all powerful server are expensive now. I believe market for cheap but powerful server are big, and no one is working on this area.I know the profit is not big, but by big quantity it mean big money too[/citation]

That is already done (but as more of a work around) build a standard PC.
Many high end gaming motherboards work well in a server environment, and can easily handle a high traffic website.
Most web hosting does not need a super powerful server (which is why virtualization is so popular). If you are running a relatively small business and are not doing anything that is hugely CPU bound (eg, rendering) then you can save a bit of money with a decent desktop PC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom