Server Atom cpu planed

ALIVE

Golden Member
May 21, 2012
1,960
0
0
#1
Link

Intel is planning the next atom oriented for the micro server area.
Part of its bordenville platform. At last an atom with ecc ram support.
Guess what intel will re introduce 64bit support to the platform lol. (atom 330 did have 64bit support)
so anyone wont to estimate how this new atom will behave next to d2700???

will be better cpu worse cpu???
lets talk for a cpu different than pilerdrive for a change.

Maybe a good choice for a zfs server???
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,126
0
0
#3
Link

Intel is planning the next atom oriented for the micro server area.
Part of its bordenville platform. At last an atom with ecc ram support.
Guess what intel will re introduce 64bit support to the platform lol. (atom 330 did have 64bit support)
so anyone wont to estimate how this new atom will behave next to d2700???

will be better cpu worse cpu???
lets talk for a cpu different than pilerdrive for a change.

Maybe a good choice for a zfs server???
Interesting. I was surprised to see the reported TDP's for the dual-core atoms to be so high (8W) TBH.

At that power surely you would get more performance from an AMD bobcat or jaguar product.

Why are the Atom chips using so much juice?
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,700
87
126
#4
Interesting. I was surprised to see the reported TDP's for the dual-core atoms to be so high (8W) TBH.

At that power surely you would get more performance from an AMD bobcat or jaguar product.

Why are the Atom chips using so much juice?
It is well known that the current Atoms aren't all that good.

The next gen ones feature 2-8 (much better) cores and everything-under-the-sun integrated, all in a 5W - 20W envelope.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/...on_Atom_processors_to_have_up_to_8_cores.html
 
Feb 2, 2009
12,775
77
126
#6
All ATOMs are 64bit, the problem lies with current 32nm ATOMs (D2xxx) and the lack of 64bit VGA drivers because they use the crap PowerVR SGX 545.
 
Feb 2, 2009
12,775
77
126
#8
I was talking about desktop Atoms
 

anikhtos

Senior member
May 1, 2011
289
0
0
#9
Interesting. I was surprised to see the reported TDP's for the dual-core atoms to be so high (8W) TBH.

At that power surely you would get more performance from an AMD bobcat or jaguar product.

Why are the Atom chips using so much juice?
well
d2700 vs e450
bobcat wins at single thread perfomance by 20%
but in multi thread bobcat and atom trade blows depending the programm

igpu there is no comparison
but intel atom gpu is good enough to decode blue ray video. maybe not netfix but if you have a blue ray movie on the machine it will play it.
playing blue ray is a minimum at least even atom can fill.

d2700 10watt versus e450 18 watt

which is more power efficient atom or bobcat??
how much of the tdp is dedicated to cpu only power??
has anyone found any metric about that?
 

anikhtos

Senior member
May 1, 2011
289
0
0
#10
All ATOMs are 64bit, the problem lies with current 32nm ATOMs (D2xxx) and the lack of 64bit VGA drivers because they use the crap PowerVR SGX 545.
i had a thread in here talking about every generation of atom being worse and worse in case of features employed to them

even intelenthusiast had to admit that d2700 official did not have 64bit support
 
Last edited:

Whiskey16

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2011
1,338
0
76
#11
Could be fine and depends upon the server loads.

For a small business or home with the primary use as a file server with up to 4 active clients, a light Atom system can make sense.

For home, I'm still using an Atom D410 Acer Easystore H341 box that has since been upgraded to 4GB RAM and WHS 2011 (64-bit of course). With the Lights-out add-on, the server is only awake when clients are up or backups, scheduled, or its torrenting client is active.

That's all I need and I can see it serving me for many more years.
 
Last edited:

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,323
0
81
#13
It's about time that Intel payed attention to this market. AMD's been the only real option for x86 microservers.
 

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,323
0
81
#15
Really? SeaMicro for example that AMD bought uses Atoms for microservers.
SeaMicro didn't use Atom for a microserver, it used Atom as the processor element for a many-core lightweight server platform, kind of like Oracle's SPARC T3-based stuff. And like Oracle's SPARC T3, SeaMicro's Atom server is only useful for a very small set of applications, not only due to Atom's performance, but also due to Atom's lack of essential features like VT-x or support for >4GB of RAM. OTOH, AMD's low-power server chips are reasonably feature-complete.
 
Apr 22, 2012
20,395
0
106
#16
SeaMicro didn't use Atom for a microserver, it used Atom as the processor element for a many-core lightweight server platform, kind of like Oracle's SPARC T3-based stuff. And like Oracle's SPARC T3, SeaMicro's Atom server is only useful for a very small set of applications, not only due to Atom's performance, but also due to Atom's lack of essential features like VT-x or support for >4GB of RAM. OTOH, AMD's low-power server chips are reasonably feature-complete.
Maybe the term microservers needs a definition.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/09/10/a...icroservers-including-one-with-an-intel-chip/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...nse_MicroServers_for_Big_Data_Industries.html

Even Xeons and Opterons fits in there.
 
Last edited:

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,323
0
81
#18
Feb 2, 2009
12,775
77
126
#20
but intel atom gpu is good enough to decode blue ray video. maybe not netfix but if you have a blue ray movie on the machine it will play it.
playing blue ray is a minimum at least even atom can fill.
I have the D2700DC and D2800MT, none of them can play BluRay. They CANNOT even play 1080p videos on YouTube. 720p videos is the maximum those two can play on youtube.
 
Apr 22, 2012
20,395
0
106
#22
You could probably fit a POWER7 in there, but that's missing the point :p
The example you show completely counter your original statement about microservers. The link you use is a mobile regular AMD chip in a case. But what would that make the Mac-Mini or Intel NUC for example?

It's about time that Intel payed attention to this market. AMD's been the only real option for x86 microservers.
So there must be something else very special to microserver to validate that statement. Could you elaborate?
 
Last edited:

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,323
0
81
#23
The example you show completely counter your original statement about microservers. The link you use is a mobile regular AMD chip in a case. But what would that make the Mac-Mini or Intel NUC for example?

So there must be something else very special to microserver to validate that statement. Could you elaborate?
AMD has avoided artificially segmenting their market by disabling features on their processors, so their "mobile regular AMD chip" has feature parity with mainstream servers chips. It has full support for ECC memory and hardware virtualization, it has enough PCIe lanes to run several expansion cards (including a PCIe x16 card), and it just generally has the same type of features you'd expect from an x86 server, all while keeping the power consumption competitive with Atom. More modern AMD low-power chips will only improve on AMD's position in this space.

In contrast, dual-core Atoms don't support VT-x (although newer single core Atoms do :confused:), many Atoms don't support more than 2GB of memory, no Atom that I know of supports ECC memory, and Atoms have absolutely shit for expansion options. And of course, there's the abysmal performance. The Atom announced in this thread is the first Atom I've seen that's even remotely suitable for use in a server.

As for the machines you linked, their lack of storage and network expansion options makes them unsuited for serious server work.
 

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,323
0
81
#25


ASK THE COMMUNITY