Baserock Slab Server Pairs High-Density ARM Chips With Linux 51
Nerval's Lobster writes with a report at Slash Datacenter that a portion of the predicted low-power-ARM-servers future has arrived, in the form of Codethink's Baserock Slab ARM Server, which puts 32 cores into a half-depth 1U server. "As with other servers built on ARM architecture, Codethink intends the Baserock Slab for data centers in need of extra power efficiency. The Slab supports Baserock Linux, currently in its second development release (known as 'Secret Volcano'), as well as Debian GNU/Linux. While Baserock Linux was first developed around the X86-64 platform, its developers planned the leap to the ARM platform. Each Slab CPU node consists of a Marvell quad-core 1.33-GHz Armada XP ARM chip, 2 GB of ECC RAM, a Cogent Computer Systems CSB1726 SoM, and a 30 GB solid-state drive. The nodes are connected to the high-speed network fabric, which includes two links per compute node driving 5 Gbits/s of bonded bandwidth to each CPU, with wire-speed switching and routing at up to 119 million packets per second."
Slashvertisment (Score:4, Insightful)
The summary is almost unreadable, too
As usual the key information is missing (Score:5, Insightful)
The main question is how much GFlop per watt you get out of it, or the number of transactions per watt. Saying it is ARM so it is energy efficient is as stupid as saying it is pink so it is pretty.
Some application are best processed (energy wise) by using a kick ass power hungry GPU. Who cares if you consume a lot of electricity if you have a tremendous throughput?
Re:As usual the key information is missing (Score:4, Insightful)
Typical ARM cores consume just a fraction of the power of an X86-based server. While Codethink hasn’t outright disclosed the actual power needs of the Slab, its 260-watt power supply offers something of a clue. Meanwhile, the forward-compatible SOMs (server object managers) will allow operators to replace the CPUs with newer models.
First, it's like the GP said, "it's ARM therefore it's low power" without giving any specifications. To market this, it seems like they would really need tested specs from a decent benchmark tool.
Finally, to praise the quality of the "article", I thought "SoM" meant System on Module [wikipedia.org]. A "server object manager" sounds like something running inside a java virtual machine.
I don't understand how Geek.net thinks attaching poor quality blog posts (they're not really articles) to the Slashdot brand will help them... Slashdotters see through those BI/Cloud//DataCenter posts every time.