3 ms·
Intel Atoms are utterly useless for that. I'd wager they are useless for most anything that isn't memcpy-bound, so I wonder what makes them put 16 of them into
by revelation 10y ago
Intel Atoms are utterly useless for that. I'd wager they are useless for most anything that isn't memcpy-bound, so I wonder what makes them put 16 of them into one package.
- imaginenore 10y agoPer core they might be useless, but that's a lot of cores. So per dollar it might actually be good.
- lightedman 10y agoThe intel Atom C2750 keeps par with my AMD Athlon II X4 640. Fun fact: I was running Blender in non-GPU mode on far lower hardware than that almost 15 years ago.
- MichaelGG 10y agoFor memory-bound apps are they sort of useful? For instance, A packet forwarding system that reads a packet, does 3 main-memory lookups, then forwards or drops?
- snuxoll 10y agoNow I'm wondering how one of the 16-core chips would handle VyOS...
- gonzo 10y agoWon't be any faster than what you have today.
- snuxoll 10y agoRight now I've got a little EdgeRouter X - it would probably be faster.
- seanp2k2 10y agoHard to compare against the Cavium Octeon. x86 general purpose vs MIPS64 with dedicated offload hardware...really depends on the use-case. I have an ERLite and AFAICT it competes with stuff way above it price-wise, e.g. https://store.netgate.com/ADI/RCC-VE-2440-board.aspx https://store.netgate.com/ADI/RCC-VE-2440-board.aspx I'd rather run PFSense, but it's not worth an extra $200+ for just my home use.
- gonzo 10y agoIf you do it right, you don't have to the lookups in main memory. We have a c2758 doing 12mpps l3 routing (full BGP table) with 50 ACLs on one of these: https://netgate.com/products/xg-2758-1u.html https://netgate.com/products/xg-2758-1u.html The c3000 prototypes are due in a couple weeks.
- throwawayish 10y agoWell you have up to 16 cores fighting over one 64 bit memory bus.. so this is mostly aimed at packet-processing and filer workloads I'd say.