Passmark is not everything.
Most gamers for example care only about processor speed not cores or
threads. Throwing dual socket 18 core Xeons at a game would accomplish
nothing.
On the other hand, something like BIND by default creates as many listener
and worker threads as the processor can handle, and I suspect being able to
handle many tasks in parallel in separate threads is important. So the
4-core 8-thread ATOM might perform better against the 2-core 4-thread i3
than Passmark would indicate. For a Windows server, the i3 would probably
leave the ATOM in the dust.
I think another question is whether you want a compact case with an external
power supply, or a rackmount case with an internal power supply, depends on
where it is going. Another consideration is common spare parts like fans
and power supplies, since those are what typically fails. However a 200W
power supply probably nullifies some of the low power consumption, although
for me the main thing about low power consumption is passive cooling and
reliability.
Also do you care about features like ECC memory (probably hard to argue for
unless you worry about solar flares) and IPMI (maybe more justifiable).
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Conlin via Af
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 11:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Atom D525 vs C2750
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?
