February 1, 2010 at 18:17Overview of the initial server platforms at Hostkey.ru
We want to talk about entry-level servers that Hostkey ( www.hostkey.ru ) uses for most clients. Not so often, you need a new 2-processor Xeon, but often there is already not enough VPS or a special OS configuration is required. Often the client is worried that no one would ever climb onto his server - full control, encrypted disks, their admins. If mega-performance is not required, we put ASUS RS100-X5.
Platform
For the entry level, for the purpose of unification, we use the ASUS RS100-X5 platform. The motherboard on the 775 socket supports all Core2Duo, Core2Quad, Pentium D and Xeon 33xx, including the new processors on the 45-nm process technology. 4 DDR2 memory slots, Intel SATA ICH7R controller for 2 ports (RAID 0.1), 2 gigabit interfaces. Two indoor seating for 3.5 ”HDD, integrated low-profile DVD-ROM. You can put an internal console access module with a separate Eth-port (ASMB3-iKVM) - you can remotely go to BIOS, reboot and monitor the server, etc. There is a PCI_X riser, you can put some specific board in it.
The kit comes with a passive radiator and telescopic slide. As a feature, striking silence can be noted when the server is operating at normal load - it is almost inaudible, the power supply of a regular desktop is louder.
Why exactly her? Firstly, one platform for all 775 socket processors closes the niche of entry-level servers and excludes the “zoo”. Secondly, low power consumption - about 100W in standby mode and 160W under full load. Thirdly, support for the new 45-nm 33-series Xeon protects investments and extends server life - in 3-4 years, you can upgrade the processor to the last of that line (which has not yet really come out) and continue to operate.
Tests
We decided to test one of the temporarily vacant servers and compare how the system behaves with the 2.66 GHz and Core2 Quad Q9400 processors at the same 2.66 GHz.
We tested a server with 4GB of Kingston memory, PC2-6400 (400MHz), 2 hard drives - 250GB of Seagate 7200.10, 16M cache and 1TB of Samsung 7200RPM 32M cache, OS - Win2008 Server 64bit. The test program is PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0 and Passmark BurnInTest.
The results are only interesting in comparison (let’s omit the graphics tests):
The result of multi-threaded tests is unequivocal - 4 cores are better than 2, all tests show this - the performance increase is almost 2 times.
Working with memory happens at Core2Quad somewhat faster, hard drives work the same way.
The power consumption of the system in standby mode is the same for both processors - about 100W (0.5A), when performing the BurnIn test, Core2Duo shows 130-140W (0.6A), Core2Quad 150-160W (0.7A).
conclusions
What does this mean for us as a collocator? In a typical 42U rack, you can put 40 of these machines + 2 catalists. Power consumption will be about 5 kW. You can take a short rack (600x600), since the server has a depth of 38 cm. This frees up space in the data center, leads to resource savings - reduces the cost of operation, Deda cheaper. The same type of configuration reduces the size of spare parts, allows you to change equipment for several hours in the event of an accident - we work on SLA.
How is this comparable to other types of processors in terms of speed?
According to Passmark, the Pentium4 3.0 GHz has a rating of 487 points, the new Core i7-860 2.8 GHz - 5594, the dual-processor Xeon of the first generation at 3.2 GHz - 1300, one new Xeon E5530 2.4 GHz - 4563.
That is, a server based on Core2Duo is 4 times faster than the old P4 and faster than dual-processor systems on the old Xeon (single-core, with Hyper threading). If you need increased speed in multi-threaded computing - for example, a loaded website on CMS, then you need to take Core2Quad, it is practically not inferior to systems based on uniprocessor Xeons. The next performance step is dual-processor machines or Core i7 as something in between.
Typical use of such entry-level servers is common - websites with an exhaust of less than 100 Mbit, online stores, IP PBX based on Asterisk or MERA, hosting 1C accounting, remote workstation via RDP with a trader terminal, etc. Almost everything that cannot fit in VPS due to real-time tasks or contains confidential information that no one should dig into, even the host’s admin.
As soon as we have free servers or we will put new ones for clients, I will definitely measure them and upload them here.
Platform
For the entry level, for the purpose of unification, we use the ASUS RS100-X5 platform. The motherboard on the 775 socket supports all Core2Duo, Core2Quad, Pentium D and Xeon 33xx, including the new processors on the 45-nm process technology. 4 DDR2 memory slots, Intel SATA ICH7R controller for 2 ports (RAID 0.1), 2 gigabit interfaces. Two indoor seating for 3.5 ”HDD, integrated low-profile DVD-ROM. You can put an internal console access module with a separate Eth-port (ASMB3-iKVM) - you can remotely go to BIOS, reboot and monitor the server, etc. There is a PCI_X riser, you can put some specific board in it.
The kit comes with a passive radiator and telescopic slide. As a feature, striking silence can be noted when the server is operating at normal load - it is almost inaudible, the power supply of a regular desktop is louder.
Why exactly her? Firstly, one platform for all 775 socket processors closes the niche of entry-level servers and excludes the “zoo”. Secondly, low power consumption - about 100W in standby mode and 160W under full load. Thirdly, support for the new 45-nm 33-series Xeon protects investments and extends server life - in 3-4 years, you can upgrade the processor to the last of that line (which has not yet really come out) and continue to operate.
Tests
We decided to test one of the temporarily vacant servers and compare how the system behaves with the 2.66 GHz and Core2 Quad Q9400 processors at the same 2.66 GHz.
Intel Core 2 Duo E7300
Intel Core2 Quad Q9400
We tested a server with 4GB of Kingston memory, PC2-6400 (400MHz), 2 hard drives - 250GB of Seagate 7200.10, 16M cache and 1TB of Samsung 7200RPM 32M cache, OS - Win2008 Server 64bit. The test program is PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0 and Passmark BurnInTest.
The results are only interesting in comparison (let’s omit the graphics tests):
The result of multi-threaded tests is unequivocal - 4 cores are better than 2, all tests show this - the performance increase is almost 2 times.
Working with memory happens at Core2Quad somewhat faster, hard drives work the same way.
The power consumption of the system in standby mode is the same for both processors - about 100W (0.5A), when performing the BurnIn test, Core2Duo shows 130-140W (0.6A), Core2Quad 150-160W (0.7A).
conclusions
What does this mean for us as a collocator? In a typical 42U rack, you can put 40 of these machines + 2 catalists. Power consumption will be about 5 kW. You can take a short rack (600x600), since the server has a depth of 38 cm. This frees up space in the data center, leads to resource savings - reduces the cost of operation, Deda cheaper. The same type of configuration reduces the size of spare parts, allows you to change equipment for several hours in the event of an accident - we work on SLA.
How is this comparable to other types of processors in terms of speed?
According to Passmark, the Pentium4 3.0 GHz has a rating of 487 points, the new Core i7-860 2.8 GHz - 5594, the dual-processor Xeon of the first generation at 3.2 GHz - 1300, one new Xeon E5530 2.4 GHz - 4563.
That is, a server based on Core2Duo is 4 times faster than the old P4 and faster than dual-processor systems on the old Xeon (single-core, with Hyper threading). If you need increased speed in multi-threaded computing - for example, a loaded website on CMS, then you need to take Core2Quad, it is practically not inferior to systems based on uniprocessor Xeons. The next performance step is dual-processor machines or Core i7 as something in between.
Typical use of such entry-level servers is common - websites with an exhaust of less than 100 Mbit, online stores, IP PBX based on Asterisk or MERA, hosting 1C accounting, remote workstation via RDP with a trader terminal, etc. Almost everything that cannot fit in VPS due to real-time tasks or contains confidential information that no one should dig into, even the host’s admin.
As soon as we have free servers or we will put new ones for clients, I will definitely measure them and upload them here.