Yes, but Eric's i3 suggestion, in a Newegg combo kit is $222 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.171263 2) as an example. Add a $100 case and it is just a little more than half the price of this SM C2750. It doubles the TDP but for a CPU that scores 3.5 times better than the ATOM on the PassMark CPU score. This example is micro ATX but mini ITX boards are available. You have to really want low power to pay so much more for the ATOM. This might explain why the ATOM server market is so relaxed.
PC Blaze Broadband > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof via Af > Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 11:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Atom D525 vs C2750 > > I've been pretty happy with the D510/D525 even with the limited speed, cores, > memory addressing and onboard cache. I like the low power consumption and passive > heatsinks. > > What I'm looking at is Supermicro 5018A-TN4: > > http://gopcn.com/i-16556899-supermicro-1u-atom-5018a-tn4.html > > Not all that cheap, but it's a genuine server with ECC memory, IPMI, short depth > rackmount, and with the 2.5" HDD bracket can easily hold two SSD's for a software > RAID1 configuration. Set the fan at lowest speed and even if it fails it should not > really be needed unless you have it in a hostile environment. Probably fine with 4MB > RAM and 128GB storage, maybe more storage for RADIUS or CACTI. > > BIND does a good job of multithreading and will use however many cores you give it, > not sure about RADIUS and CACTI. D525 has 2 cores and 4 threads, > C2750 has 8 cores and 8 threads plus a somewhat higher clock speed, so I'm figuring 2- > 3 times the performance? It's definitely more money though. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Conlin via Af > Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 9:58 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Atom D525 vs C2750 > > We have been planning on standing up a couple of light duty Linux servers to upgrade > our DNS and RADIUS and maybe even a CACTI upgrade later. Are these newer > ATOM platforms and a couple of small SSD's up to these tasks? How does the D525 > do? > > It appears the C2750 has been out for nearly a year but I'm are not finding too many > products using them. Intel's chart makes it look like the C2550 (4 cores vs 8 cores) > might be a more cost effective replacement to the D525. > But there are even fewer C2550 motherboards out there and they are not significantly > cheaper than the C2750 or even the D525. Are we just not looking in the right places > or is this low-cost low-TDP server market just really small? > > PC > Blaze Broadband > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof via Af > > Sent: Saturday, December 6, 2014 2:57 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [AFMUG] Atom D525 vs C2750 > > > > I have several small Linux servers using Atom D525 processors for > > tasks > like DNS and > > RADIUS, I even have one running Win7 that I use for PRTG and CNUT and > > RDP sessions. Put a couple 128 GB SSDs in them and with passive > > cooling and > low TDP > > you have an almost indestructible little server. > > > > Going forward, I'm wondering if I should look at the newer C2750 > > version, > it would > > seem to support more memory and storage, 4x as many cores, 2x as many > threads, > > higher clock speed, more cache, supports ECC memory, but at a higher > > price > and TDP, > > and the Ethernet NICs might not be as good as the 82574L chips on the > motherboards > > I have been using. Also at that price point you could question the > > value > compared to > > just using an i3 or E3 processor. And even if the D525 is an old > > design > with limited > > cores, cache and memory addressing, it does the job, so the only > > reason to > use the > > newer chips may be for future proofing. > > > > So has anyone done the analysis or actually deployed C2750 based servers? >
