Intel Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • alexander.dumbass alexander.dumbass • Dec 9, 2012 4:30 PM Flag

    Boston Viridis Servers

    I couldn't find the Calxeda reply to Intel. I need some more info ...

    "you rightsize the CPU to the task in hand"
    My problem is Calxeda chose a point workload that was right sized for their server and then said that the other server was not as good. To compare a workload that is tuned for your configuration and then to compare it with another system that has a different "tuned spot" is OK. They were just dishonest about computing the metrics to compare.

    Example: An older Atom D525 results on a Supermicro board yields 2100 requests per second on a dual core w/ hyperthreading.

    A Supermicro with a 1.6ghz Atom D525 CPU w/ 2 core and 2 threads measures at 2,100 requests per second. The Atom D525 is a 13W Pineview design released in Q2/2010. It operates at 1/3 the Calxeda performance and take 3x the power. It does not say where the bottleneck is or what that system configuration is other than a Supermicro X7SPF5 with a price of $199.

    The network connnection is with a Dual Intel 82574L Gigabit Ethernet Controller so I would have to assume that the Atom was CPU saturated like the Calxeda part.

    Specifications Mfr Part Number: X7SPE-HF-D525-O
    CPU: Integrated Intel Atom D525 processor(1.8GHz)
    Chipset: Intel ICH9R
    Memory: 2x 204-pin DDR3-800 SO-DIMMs Slot, Single Channel, Non-ECC, Unbuffered, Max capacity upto 4GB
    Slots: 1x PCI-Express x4 Slot (runs on x16 Slot)
    SATA: 6x SATA2 Ports, Support RAID 0, 1, 5, 10
    Video: Matrox G200eW Graphic Controller
    LAN: Dual Intel 82574L Gigabit Ethernet Controller
    Ports: 8x USB 2.0 Ports (2 rear, 5 by headers, 1 Type A connector); 2x PS/2 Ports; 2x Serial Ports (1 rear, 1 by header); 1x VGA Port; 2x RJ45 LAN Ports
    Form Factor: Proprietary, 7.5 x 6.75 inch / 19.05 x 17.15 cm
    Package: Retail
    RoHS Compliant

    Sort:  Newest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • theblueredmonk theblueredmonk • Dec 9, 2012 6:25 PM Flag

      "you rightsize the CPU to the task in hand"
      My problem is Calxeda chose a point workload that was right sized for their server and then said that the other server was not as good. To compare a workload that is tuned for your configuration and then to compare it with another system that has a different "tuned spot" is OK. They were just dishonest about computing the metrics to compare.
      ----

      I kind of agree with you, but...

      The whole point of these 'poor cpu' servers is they are only usable for certain workloads, so you wouldn't expect Calxeda to choose a workload that highlights how poor they are:)

      The webserver example is a good use case for them, although as you point out an Atom server is a better comparison. Calxeda's numbers are for a full node (SoC, memory, network etc) so you'll need to add them to the Atom server.

 
INTC
24.05May 23 4:00 PMEDT