PE1950 - EnergySmart - any disadvantages?
marcus at synchromedia.co.uk
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
> on 'energy smart' boxes. But these would be 30-50% faster chips
> 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
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!
Synchromedia Limited: Creators of http://www.smartmessages.net/
UK resellers of info at hand CRM solutions
marcus at synchromedia.co.uk | http://www.synchromedia.co.uk/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Linux-PowerEdge