8 ms·
Online Labs – ARM servers in the cloud
- letmethink12 12y agoNice option, how much compute power does these ARM servers offer though?
- tuxone 12y agoReally silly test 10$/mo droplet $ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2000 run sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 1 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2000 Test execution summary: total time: 1.5297s total number of events: 10000 total time taken by event execution: 1.5219 per-request statistics: min: 0.14ms avg: 0.15ms max: 4.68ms approx. 95 percentile: 0.16ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 10000.0000/0.00 execution time (avg/stddev): 1.5219/0.00 C1 $ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2000 run sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 1 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2000 Test execution summary: total time: 27.0053s total number of events: 10000 total time taken by event execution: 26.9926 per-request statistics: min: 2.69ms avg: 2.70ms max: 2.84ms approx. 95 percentile: 2.72ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 10000.0000/0.00 execution time (avg/stddev): 26.9926/0.00
- zeograd 12y agoNot that it'd cover for the difference but note that you're only using one of the 4 threads of the C1. If I'm not mistaken you only have 1 CPU for a droplet at this price.
- dwild 12y agoThe Arm cores are also dedicated while the one on digital ocean is shared.
- werkshy 12y agoubuntu@c1-10-1-18-157:~$ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2000 --num-threads=4 run sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 4 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2000 Test execution summary: total time: 6.7674s total number of events: 10000 total time taken by event execution: 27.0485 per-request statistics: min: 2.69ms avg: 2.70ms max: 7.00ms approx. 95 percentile: 2.70ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 2500.0000/17.36 execution time (avg/stddev): 6.7621/0.00
- twotwotwo 12y agoFor comparison, Cortex-A15-based (32-bit Tegra K1) Acer Chromebook 13: sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 1 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2000 Test execution summary: total time: 8.8170s total number of events: 10000 total time taken by event execution: 8.8083 per-request statistics: min: 0.83ms avg: 0.88ms max: 21.43ms approx. 95 percentile: 0.95ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 10000.0000/0.00 execution time (avg/stddev): 8.8083/0.00 Total time is 2.4926s with --num-threads=4.
- monstermonster 12y agoNot a scientific measure by ANY measure, but a similar core I googled appears to kick out about 200 bogomips whereas a virtual Xeon E5-2690 v2 core on one of my machines knocks out 5984 bogomips. I have 20 of those Xeon cores and 128Gb of RAM in a 2U. Comparing the ratio of bogomips you'd have to get 598 of those ARM machines in a 2U to get the same bogomips. Like I said this isn't even slightly scientific but is at least interesting trivia.
- rakoo 12y agoThanks for the trivia. Just to continue on this path, how many virtualized instances can you put on your machine ?
- monstermonster 12y agoNot tried to push it but it has 20 Windows Server 2012 R2 instances running on it at the moment all with 8Gb of memory (this is overcommitted dynamic memory). Disk is on a SAN larger than my kitchen. I span up a Linux VM quickly to do a bogomips on :) I can probably push 40 of those onto it without it bending too terribly. If I knock the RAM down to 2Gb an instance I could probably quite happily get 64-100 on it in theory. I think memory bandwidth might kill it before CPU does. We have two almost full (18 each) 42U racks of those machines (bar switches) so across the 720 E5 cores with 4.6TiB of RAM there is about 4.3 million bogomips. Fun :) (most of this is corporate fileservers, exchange, AD, various crappy apps, network appliances, web servers, SQL servers and idles at around 20% in use). If it all went off you'd need earplugs and fireman's equipment.
- dwild 12y agoI found other source where they said it's around 1200 bogomips for a single core. That would means that you only need 5 times more core which is far from being an issue, 100 cores, which means only 25 processors.
- monstermonster 12y agoInteresting! However if you want one fast core, you're screwed :)
- spindritf 12y agoI haven't used Online.net in a while but they're on Twitter, on IRC, they have a forum based on Discourse[1], now this. It's like a fresher OVH. French, too. The servers have four logical processors like this processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v7l) Features : half thumb fastmult vfp edsp thumbee fpv3 tls idiva idivt vfpd32 lpae CPU implementer : 0x56 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x2 CPU part : 0x584 CPU revision : 2 [1] https://community.cloud.online.net/ https://community.cloud.online.net/
- Marat_Dukhan 12y agoThanx for posting this info. The cpuinfo matches Marvell Armada XP.
- hipaulshi 12y agofree -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 2020 97 1923 0 6 40 -/+ buffers/cache: 49 1970 Swap: 0 0 0 Server seems to be located in France { "as": "AS12876 ONLINE S.A.S.", "city": "", "country": "France", "countryCode": "FR", "isp": "Tiscali France", "lat": 48.86, "lon": 2.35, "org": "Tiscali France", "query": "212.47.232.90", "region": "", "regionName": "", "status": "success", "timezone": "Europe/Paris", "zip": "" }
- rakoo 12y agoI wonder if the development of this idea will be hampered because of the ARM architecture, or if on the contrary it will boost ARM compatibility from developers. They claim they can have a better density of instances with physical ARM chips than with virtualized x64 instances, and still use less power. If this takes on it can be amazing.
- adsche 12y ago> Follow @online_en on Twitter and send us a direct message with your email. Don't they have to follow YOU to be able to do that?
- 13 12y agoYes. They won't be getting anybody sending them a direct message.
- iancarroll 12y agoJust tweet them and they'll follow you.
- adsche 12y agoThanks, used IRC, preferred that anyway, was just curious if I missed something regarding twitter.
- BillinghamJ 12y agoFor a while you could configure your account to allow DMs from people you don't follow. That was removed, but I suspect it may still exist for big companies/verified accounts.
- franze 12y agosudo rm / -rf --no-preserve-root but it's not as fun as it sounds
- Termana 12y agoSomething that has hopefully not been overlooked for the paid version - making sure there is an ability to restart from the control panel (or whatever) - after issuing the shutdown command as root I thought refreshing the page might attempt to bring it back up but alas I was locked out for the rest of the 15 minutes.
- nlstitch 12y agoArgh.. 15 minutes wasn't enough to download openjdk7 and run some tests :-(. Can anyone invite me?
- oneofthose 12y agoTheir next generation should include a SoC with a GPU. GPUs make these little processors even more interesting.
- twotwotwo 12y agoI think the big use case for ARM in datacenters, over the next few years, is for servers whose CPU usage is very low today--they're consistently network-bound or they just act as a relatively dumb interface to RAM or disk (memcached, some distributed DBs, some dumb proxies). Baidu uses ARM for cloud storage, Facebook used AMD servers for memcached despite their lagging Intel on speed. Basically, you look elsewhere when a Xeon is too much. Someday comes a point where apps that actually are compute-bound might want to use more, slower cores for power/density/cost/etc.--I just don't think that cutover is tomorrow for the kind of apps (most of) you or I work on. Further out: This is a Marvell-designed core that looks slower than the Cortex-A15-based Tegra K1 in a Chromebook (posted results elsewhere in the comments; it could be a clock-speed issue, not anything inherent to the core designs). Further out, there're some 64-bit ARM cores (Cortex-A57, X-Gene, Project Denver though that may not wind up in servers) and at process bumps (like TSMC 20nm). Related, check out http://www.anandtech.com/show/8580/hp-appliedmicro-and-ti-bring-new-arm-servers-to-retail http://www.anandtech.com/show/8580/hp-appliedmicro-and-ti-br... if you haven't. Of course, Intel isn't sleeping, and low-power x86 chips will improve, too; there will be 14nm versions of the Atom-based Xeons someday. As ever, fun times.
- tonyplee 12y agoThis Marvell SOC has 16 Serdes integrated inside the SOC can be partition to Gige ethernet, SATA, or PCIe in any numbers of ways. http://www.marvell.com/embedded-processors/armada-xp/ http://www.marvell.com/embedded-processors/armada-xp/ Along with low power, make it very interesting. I can see someone put 64, 128 of them in 1U chassis. This might be interesting low cost system for someone who need simulcast live video streams to millions of users at really low cost. "64 4 cores CPU each with integrated 16 GIGE ports for fan out live video stream that potentially fit inside 1U chassis"
- nbkolchin 12y ago128 Armada cores in 1U is nearly impossible due to cooling issues.
- 12y ago
- fiatmoney 12y agoIsn't the whole point of "the cloud" to abstract away the specific hardware you're using?
- wmf 12y agoNope, the cloud is about automation and self-service. If the provider tells you what you're getting you can always ignore that information if you don't care. But some customers care about hardware specifics.
- wahern 12y agoYes if you're utilizing a service built in "the cloud". No if you're implementing said service.
- edouardb 12y agoYou can access the service preview, ask an invitation on twitter @online_en or on irc.online.net #onlinelabs
- IgorPartola 12y agoThis is really cool. The price is obviously going to be a question. The other thing I wonder is if this is more or less reliable than a VPS, in case of hardware failure.
- nbkolchin 12y agoNot impressive at all. Performance is not different from RK3188. Disk speed is also not impressing. Not good example of ARM server. I wonder what advantages this product have if any? | Online Net | RK3188 Coremark (single) | 3288.391976 | 4745.333755 Coremark (dual cpu) | 6579.488445 | 8505.209441 Coremark (4-cpu) | 12985.958932 | 13930.001741 dhrystones | 3204101.2 | 5810575.0 linpack_dp | 96396.624 | 280673.07 linpack_sp | 141666.344 | 286485.812 nbench ASSIGNMENT | 5.4852 | 11.569 nbench BITFIELD | 1.8627e+08 | 3.1242e+08 nbench FOURIER | 4346.6 | 9248.2 nbench FP EMULATION | 94.734 | 143.8 nbench HUFFMAN | 1035 | 1444.5 nbench IDEA | 2035.4 | 1963.3 nbench LU DECOMPOSITION | 183.26 | 459.03 nbench NEURAL NET | 8.0897 | 13.392 nbench NUMERIC SORT | 573.47 | 733.99 nbench STRING SORT | 56.463 | 108.94 scimark Composite Score | 113.53 | 230.20 scimark FFT | 121.34 | 199.90 scimark LU | 92.63 | 279.92 scimark MonteCarlo | 64.20 | 81.53 scimark SOR | 191.28 | 420.49 scimark Sparse matmult | 98.23 | 169.17 stream Add | 1239.3447 | 1615.2325 stream Copy | 1168.6045 | 1147.0347 stream Scale | 926.4318 | 1599.6019 stream Triad | 1066.3372 | 1528.7064 stream_omp Add | 3159.7990 | 1271.3516 stream_omp Copy | 2603.3387 | 1193.8474 stream_omp Scale | 2372.8052 | 1653.1527 stream_omp Triad | 2595.0168 | 1245.1069
- pmav 12y agoMore data: ubuntu@c1-10-1-2-29:~$ dd if=/dev/zero of=test1 bs=1M count=512 512+0 records in 512+0 records out 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 5.43834 s, 98.7 MB/s ubuntu@c1-10-1-2-29:~$ dd if=test1 of=test2 bs=1M count=512 512+0 records in 512+0 records out 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 5.869 s, 91.5 MB/s ubuntu@c1-10-1-2-29:~$ dd if=test2 of=/dev/null bs=1M count=512 512+0 records in 512+0 records out 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 0.60429 s, 888 MB/s