4 ms·
A poster above claimed the servers were “48 logical cores (2 x 12-core Xeons) and 64GB RAM”, which really isn’t what I would consider such a “beast” of a machin
by danachow 5y ago
A poster above claimed the servers were “48 logical cores (2 x 12-core Xeons) and 64GB RAM”, which really isn’t what I would consider such a “beast” of a machine when the RAM is in laptop territory, and a modest number of cores for a server.
- smackeyacky 5y agoNowdays you can purchase that machine on the second hand market for something like $200-$300. They are measurably faster than even contemporary laptops though plus you often get ECC ram and raid disk setups and the good old Xeon didn't used to ramp up and down in speed, it just ran fast all the time. I'd still characterise that as a beast, especially on $/performance terms (although the power consumption is a worry).
- toast0 5y agoXeon covers a pretty wide variety of chips. Of course, the Pentium II Xeons didn't have speedstep either. 12-core tells us either fairly high end but older or kind of medium-low but newer. Dual socket tells us not the really low end Xeon that shares a socket (and probably a lot more) with the high end enthusiast desktop chips.
- kaba0 5y agoDon’t we have server machines with multi-TBs of RAM nowadays?
- orra 5y agoLate reply, but you make a good point. Perhaps I am thinking five years ago, and back then the specs seemed more impressive. Also, I hadn't twigged that “logical” cores are distinct from physical cores, which made the core count seem more impressive.