Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 22:47:57 -0600 From: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org> To: Charles Sprickman <spork@inch.com> Cc: "Jin Guojun [DSD]" <j_guojun@lbl.gov>, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Feedback on Intel server SRMK2 Message-ID: <20020911224757.A58759@panzer.kdm.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0209111957120.28660-100000@shell.inch.com>; from spork@inch.com on Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 07:59:28PM -0400 References: <3D7FD444.7B89FE2F@lbl.gov> <Pine.BSF.4.44.0209111957120.28660-100000@shell.inch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 19:59:28 -0400, Charles Sprickman wrote: > On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Jin Guojun [DSD] wrote: > > > Have not used this. For $300, you can get dual AMD or single P4 M/B + 1 CPU. > > Right, but I'm needing the whole machine, most specifically the box. A > similar new 1U of decent quality will be about 3x's more cash. > > > Intel E7500 chipset does not have such bug, but the memory bandwidth (545) is > > much less > > then the ServerWork chipset (672 MB/s) when compared with same XEON CPU. > > Cool, it does have a ServerWorks chipset. I guess that's a good thing. The chipset (ServerSet III LE) on that board is fine. I doubt it has the 672MB/sec memory bandwidth Jin is referring to, though. I think he's talking about the ServerWorks Grand Champion chipset. The memory bandwidth on the III LE chipset will be pretty good, though. From looking at the hardware (Adaptec Ultra160 SCSI, dual Intel 10/100 nics), I think it would make an excellent FreeBSD box. The only issue I have with the Intel rackmount boxes I've seen is the case design. The drive carriers are sometimes a bit cheezy, and the cases themselves aren't always as well thought out as they could be. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@kdm.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020911224757.A58759>