4 ms·
Dell Unveils Via Nano-Based Server (pulls 20-29 watts @ full load)
- timdorr 17y agoAnyone have any benchmarks of the Atom or Nano chips as a webserver?
- dizz 17y agoAnd what's really cool with these guys is that you can have a full rack - 252 nodes - all running with a total power load of 7.2KW! http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2009/05/22/ServerUnder30W.aspx http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2009/05/22/ServerUnder30W.a...
- patrickg-zill 17y agoI wonder though, if you compared the performance of one of these 12-Nano systems, with a loaded 48GB RAM, dual quad-core Nehalem system running Xen and connected to relatively fast disks, which would be faster overall? 48GB RAM = 4GB per Xen slice if you have 12 slices.
- wmf 17y agoIt's pretty easy to calculate; the Nehalem system would have 8x3GHz = 24GHz while the Nano 12-pack has 12x1.6GHz = 19.2GHz and Nehalem does significantly more work per cycle. The Nehalem could have 12x2TB SATA or 12x450GB SAS disks with RAID while the Nano has 12x500GB laptop disks without RAID. You'd also save on switch ports, etc. If you're given the choice between a slow private server, or a small share of a larger server, take the small share. (with apologies to Stuart Cheshire)
- bayareaguy 17y agoIn general I agree but the Nano system could be better if - you need physically independent systems for some reason or - you have predictable data-parallel workloads with appropriate interconnect or - the overall system cost was much cheaper