Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Low(er) power server issues

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • stevea
    replied
    Originally posted by gururise View Post
    What exactly are you going to be doing with your server? That will determine whether or not you need a 5050e.
    I described that in the top of post#1 and along the way.

    Originally posted by gururise View Post
    While the low power parts from AMD tied with a descent IGP motherboard (780g) are excellent parts, your still probably looking at a total system idle of between 45 - 65 watts (depending on the efficiency of your power supply).
    Agreed,

    Originally posted by gururise View Post
    Have you looked at the BeagleBoard? Its a fanless single board computer based on the Arm Cortex-A8 core. Costs $149, idles at 1 watt (5 watts at max CPU) and is probably about as fast as an Atom based computer.
    I have seen it. I use another OMAP3 processor at work, we ported a BSD style OS ported to it. It is a sweet little embedded CPU, but it doesn't come close to an Intel Atom330 (perhaps half the performance). The Beagle doesn't have the interfaces needed, not even close. I have a NAS at home w/ a 500Mhz Marvell ARM using SATA & GigE and the CPU can't keep up. The OMAP is clearly a bit faster, but still will fall far short.

    Has a DSP core, people are watching 1080p video on it.
    TI (the cpu mfgr) makes the OMAP for music/vid handheld use, so this is what the architecture does well.

    TI has an OMAP4 family of ARM Cortex-A9 parts announced that go at least to 1Ghz, but I haven't seen enough details.


    I agree that there are probably are some <10Watt CPUs out there that can do the job, but they either cost a lot or else are configured (like the beagleboard) w/o sufficient peripherals.

    It's a shame. I can imagine a lot of uses for say an OMAP3 on stackable PC104+ form factor to you could made a decent low power system - totally customized. The typical cost is a deal-killer tho'.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by stevea View Post
    Deanjo,

    There is no 7200.12 with 1.5TB size and never was. Some websites speculate Seagate may release one, but currently the 1.5TB Seagates are the 7200.11 (firmware problems) or 5900.12 (5900rpm, low power). You have misidentified your troubled product, and you have now misinformed & confused others. You should be more careful & accurate when you badmouth a product.

    It's silly to drop Seagate b/c of one troubled product like the 7200.11. If you look at storagereview.com you will clearly see that every disk manufacturer WD, Hitachi, Fujitsu, Maxtor have had "klinker" product families. When it becomes a pattern then it might make sense, but that is not the case for Seagate. WD is IMO worse, and Hitachi has had more spectacular disk-family failures.

    Also important to me is that the 7200.11 fiasco was due to firmware and not a mechanical issue. It appears that Seagate shipped the original 7200.11s with a firmware problem that could cause permanent failure. The first updated firmware had an equally evil bug. Reports indicate the 3rd firmware set for this family is fine, but I have no direct experience. I'd rather just avoid that line and get the lower power and generally higher performance 7200.12s

    It's also the reason you should do some homework before buying any drive. The customer reviews of newegg or the forums of storagereview would have allowed you to easily avoid your bad experience.

    -S
    Right looking back at the receipts the 7200.12 that died in 48 hours were 1TB's. They were replacing the "fixed" 1.5TB - 7200.11's. as well as a bunch of 500GB 7200.11's.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevea
    replied
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    I would stay away from the 7200.12's as well. I've personally had a couple of 1.5 TB drives 7200.12's that died (bad sectors) within a period of 48 hours of being used bought from two different suppliers. I was asking my local supplier about them as well and I guess the RMA rate on them is so high that they are going to drop the seagate line all together.
    Deanjo,

    There is no 7200.12 with 1.5TB size and never was. Some websites speculate Seagate may release one, but currently the 1.5TB Seagates are the 7200.11 (firmware problems) or 5900.12 (5900rpm, low power). You have misidentified your troubled product, and you have now misinformed & confused others. You should be more careful & accurate when you badmouth a product.

    It's silly to drop Seagate b/c of one troubled product like the 7200.11. If you look at storagereview.com you will clearly see that every disk manufacturer WD, Hitachi, Fujitsu, Maxtor have had "klinker" product families. When it becomes a pattern then it might make sense, but that is not the case for Seagate. WD is IMO worse, and Hitachi has had more spectacular disk-family failures.

    Also important to me is that the 7200.11 fiasco was due to firmware and not a mechanical issue. It appears that Seagate shipped the original 7200.11s with a firmware problem that could cause permanent failure. The first updated firmware had an equally evil bug. Reports indicate the 3rd firmware set for this family is fine, but I have no direct experience. I'd rather just avoid that line and get the lower power and generally higher performance 7200.12s

    It's also the reason you should do some homework before buying any drive. The customer reviews of newegg or the forums of storagereview would have allowed you to easily avoid your bad experience.

    -S
    Last edited by stevea; 07-07-2009, 03:38 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • movieman
    replied
    Yeah, it doesn't appear to have any ATA or LAN interface, which isn't exactly good news for a server .

    Leave a comment:


  • movieman
    replied
    Originally posted by gururise View Post
    Its a fanless single board computer based on the Arm Cortex-A8 core. Costs $149, idles at 1 watt (5 watts at max CPU) and is probably about as fast as an Atom based computer.
    In my experience of ARM embedded systems I doubt a 600MHz ARM and attached DSP is as fast as a dual-core Ion system. Certainly if you want CPU performance the ARM is going to struggle to keep up with a dual-core, quad-thread x86 running nearly three times as fast.

    I did look at the Beagle Board at one stage, but from what I remember it doesn't enough I/O to make a viable server.

    Leave a comment:


  • gururise
    replied
    What exactly are you going to be doing with your server? That will determine whether or not you need a 5050e. While the low power parts from AMD tied with a descent IGP motherboard (780g) are excellent parts, your still probably looking at a total system idle of between 45 - 65 watts (depending on the efficiency of your power supply).

    Have you looked at the BeagleBoard? Its a fanless single board computer based on the Arm Cortex-A8 core. Costs $149, idles at 1 watt (5 watts at max CPU) and is probably about as fast as an Atom based computer. If it has enough power for your needs, you may consider it, as it is silent (passively cooled). You can run Ubuntu, OpenEmbedded or Android on it. Has a DSP core, people are watching 1080p video on it.
    Last edited by gururise; 07-01-2009, 02:27 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • deanjo
    replied
    Originally posted by stevea View Post
    Yes these run about 8/5.0 Watt at active/idle, but I have fears about the 7200.11 firmware problems and would prefer the 7200.12 which are still lower power.
    I would stay away from the 7200.12's as well. I've personally had a couple of 1.5 TB drives 7200.12's that died (bad sectors) within a period of 48 hours of being used bought from two different suppliers. I was asking my local supplier about them as well and I guess the RMA rate on them is so high that they are going to drop the seagate line all together.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevea
    replied
    To Curaga - *ALL* GigE chips use DMA and nearly all offload checksumming and some I P& multicast subscribing too. It's been two decades since I've seem a LANCE design where the CPU passes the enet data.

    Originally posted by Adarion View Post
    Well the VIA boards with padlock suck up few power for an x86 so if the implemented (hardware supported) algorithm is fine for you then it could be the best solution since
    I'm not completely satisfied with hardware crypto, since the crypto required may change over time. Also these low-end CPUs do not perform well in NAS applications (see smallnetbuilder.com for comparisons). Maybe a better VIA mobo would help, but they seem unavailable here.

    I agree that waiting for a great embedded NAS board may be an intolerable wait.

    Power supplies are still an issue, since most normal PC ones tend to be available in horrible dimensions of 450 and far above
    I completely agree. Who needs these 850W PS ??? Most PC PS operate most efficiently around 65-85% of stated capacity, and most systems have an initial power draw that is the maximum draw. So the goal is to choose the minimum sufficient PS capacity to get past startup. Of course a little headroom for upgrades is desirable

    I recently purchased a 'kill-a-watt' power meter and applied this to two systems. My current server (3x disks, 2 in standby, 2.66Ghz P4HT 65W TPD, 1 GB DRAM), has an idle consumption around 66W, and at CPU load ~112W, then about 4 extra watts if I hit the disk hard. I expected this system would have idled over 100W so this was a shock. So my estimate is that the idle CPU (no speedstep or hibernate) uses only around 20-25W. The load CPU power is obviously limited around 65WTPD. So I don't believe that switching to the AMD part will offer much idle power saving, but will offer a lot more saving at load. Since my current system power is surprisingly low, I will implement the full functionality on this system as-is and then measure the average power - and only then make a decision to replace the mobo&cpu.

    The other surprise is that my workstation system (3x disks in a RAID0, 2.66Ghz E6700 Core2Duo, 6GM DRAM) uses ~132W at idle and ~210W at full load, peaking around 240W at startup. I could easily use a 300W PS on this heavy-duty system.

    On the Seagates: I was referring to the 320GB 7200.11 model (1 disc spinning)
    Yes these run about 8/5.0 Watt at active/idle, but I have fears about the 7200.11 firmware problems and would prefer the 7200.12 which are still lower power.

    Leave a comment:


  • Adarion
    replied
    Well the VIA boards with padlock suck up few power for an x86 so if the implemented (hardware supported) algorithm is fine for you then it could be the best solution since the padlock should do very fine on encryption while the VIA C7 CPUs are capable of normal tasks while sucking up few Watts but not good for more intensive computing.
    Still needs comparison of the different vendors/boards and they're not all great.
    If you dislike the HW crypto chips then the AMD 4850e/5050e should be the best, reliable and still cheap solution on today's market.
    Power supplies are still an issue, since most normal PC ones tend to be available in horrible dimensions of 450 and far above which no sensible box will ever use but these micro PSUs are rare and expensive. I personally go with some 350/400 ones with 80+/85+ rating. And there was a test in Germany's probably best allround computer mag (c't by heise press) some time ago which showed the efficiencies under low, medium and high load. So I took their results as a base for my decisions. And my PSUs give quite a good picture in efficiency even on low load.

    Of course you could wait some time until something better arrives or the non-x86-embedded ones get better in terms of storage and expansability but I made the experience that you will wait far longer than you expected and wanted and you still don't have your machine.
    There will always be some sour grape in the bunch of them.

    On the Seagates: I was referring to the 320GB 7200.11 model (1 disc spinning) which should still be low on energy consumption 8lower than the average 7200.11 series and most earlier series). Otherwise I just put a reiser3.6 on a 500GB 7200.12 today for this one shall become my main storage operating drive. Sure, these 7200.12 are better on power usage below the line. But so they are supposed to do since these are the newer models and finally vendors (besides GPU vendors... :/ ) go for the energy efficiency.
    But it's awesome to see such a lot of specs published. I mean that's truly something to make up a decision.

    Leave a comment:


  • curaga
    replied
    Beyond the normal chipset differences, with higher cost "server" ethernet chips being orders faster, the better class also supports DMA offloading.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X