PE1950 - EnergySmart - any disadvantages?

Ricardo Stella stella at
Mon Oct 15 08:44:31 CDT 2007

Sorry if it does sound stoopeed, but would these compare to the E5320
performance wise (except for the energy savings benefits) ?

I was quoting some 1950s with X5365 processors, but higher ups insisted
on 'energy smart' boxes.  But these would be 30-50% faster chips AFAIK...

Haven't find any benchmarks for these low power chips.


Marcus Bointon wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2007, at 12:18, Faris Raouf wrote:
>> Are there any "gotchas"/disadvantages to opting for the EnergySmart
>> versions? We'll be running Centos/RedHat5 on it.
> I've been running a cluster of 4 of these lately. We upgraded 2 of  
> them to L5320 quad-cores, which are actually even lower power than  
> the dual-core LV5148s, albeit at a slower clock. Far as I can see,  
> the only downside is in storage. Because they use 2.5" drives, you  
> can't get disk performance as high as with 3.5" drives (10k rpm max),  
> size is limited as the biggest SAS 2.5" drives are 146Gb, plus  
> they're about twice the price of 3.5" drives at that size.
> Aside from that they are great performers, easily outdoing older 3.0  
> and 3.6GHz Xeon boxes.
> We're running Debian on them.
> Marcus



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: stella.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 204 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list