> I am leaning towards AMD because of ECC support well, lets look at Intel's offerings... Ram is faster than AMD's at 1333Mhz DDR3 and one gets ECC and thermal sensor for $10 over non-ECC http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820139040
This MB has two Intel ethernets and for an extra $30 an ether KVM (LOM) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182212 One needs a Xeon 34xx for ECC, the 45W versions isn't on newegg, and ignoring the one without Hyper-Threading leaves us http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117225 Yea @ 95W it isn't exactly low power, but 4 cores @ 2533MHz and another 4 Hyper-Thread cores is nice.. If you only need one core, the marketing paperwork claims it will push to 2.93GHz too. But the ram bandwidth is the big win for Intel. Avoid the temptation, but @ 2.8Ghz without ECC, this close $$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115214 Now, this gets one to 8G ECC easily...AMD's unfair advantage is all those ram slots on their multi-die MBs... A slow AMD cpu with 64G ram might be better depending on your working set / dedup requirements. Rob _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
