PE1950 - EnergySmart - any disadvantages?

Marcus Bointon marcus at
Mon Oct 15 09:02:06 CDT 2007

On 15 Oct 2007, at 14:44, Ricardo Stella wrote:

> 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.

I've not found any decent benchmarks either, but I've seen that they  
are way faster than 1850s at higher clock speeds. The woodcrest/ 
clovertown cores are just so much better than the Xeons that preceded  
them. Interestingly (being a similar core), we have some Mac Minis  
running 1.8GHz Core2 Duos, and they consistently whip our 3GHz 1850  
on CPU, and they only pull 65W at idle (the whole server, not just  
the CPU!), and they're small and cheap enough that we can use them  
like RAIC.

I'm not clear what exactly is compromised to get the lower power  
rating on the lower TDP Xeons, but they are certainly fast. I'd say  
they'll have plenty of power for regular web/db stuff, but if raw CPU  
is your real bottleneck, then the faster CPUs would be better, but  
the additional power consumption will cost you. Watching 8 cores get  
busy in htop is actually quite fun!

Marcus Bointon
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of
UK resellers of info at hand CRM solutions
marcus at |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list