By: Joe Chang (jchang6.delete@this.Xyahoo.com), May 24, 2007 4:33 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Commodity and high volume are generic descriptions,
lets look at hard numbers.
a 4-socket system (with all 4 processor sockets populated) from Dell runs $12-15K
and I mean the high-end, Xeon 7140 or Opteron 8220.
An 8-way (2 4-way nodes) from the current vendors is $90K.
so I think there is a very good market opportunity for an 8-way at the $40-50K price point,
which gives you $10K cushion to absorb the extra costs of an 8-way platform
Doug Siebert (foo@bar.bar) on 5/23/07 wrote:
---------------------------
>Jose (no@teh.win) on 5/23/07 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>The trouble with "commodity" 8 socket servers is simply the sheer real estate involved.
>>You can't fit eight sockets on a conventional motherboard, so you're looking at
>>daughter cards... and already you've walked away from "commodity." Now, there are
>>ways it *could* go (HTX slots so standardized single- or dual-socket daughter cards
>>become a commodity of sorts) but the industry likes to go its own way until the
>>vendors finally realize (again) the benefits of standardization. And the 8 socket
>>market will be small (but lucrative) enough that that may never happen.
>
>
>I've always wondered....are there technical reasons why a double sided motherboard
>with sockets on both sides can't be done? That would seem a nice way to do a 3U
>8 socket server that fits in a standard rack.
lets look at hard numbers.
a 4-socket system (with all 4 processor sockets populated) from Dell runs $12-15K
and I mean the high-end, Xeon 7140 or Opteron 8220.
An 8-way (2 4-way nodes) from the current vendors is $90K.
so I think there is a very good market opportunity for an 8-way at the $40-50K price point,
which gives you $10K cushion to absorb the extra costs of an 8-way platform
Doug Siebert (foo@bar.bar) on 5/23/07 wrote:
---------------------------
>Jose (no@teh.win) on 5/23/07 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>The trouble with "commodity" 8 socket servers is simply the sheer real estate involved.
>>You can't fit eight sockets on a conventional motherboard, so you're looking at
>>daughter cards... and already you've walked away from "commodity." Now, there are
>>ways it *could* go (HTX slots so standardized single- or dual-socket daughter cards
>>become a commodity of sorts) but the industry likes to go its own way until the
>>vendors finally realize (again) the benefits of standardization. And the 8 socket
>>market will be small (but lucrative) enough that that may never happen.
>
>
>I've always wondered....are there technical reasons why a double sided motherboard
>with sockets on both sides can't be done? That would seem a nice way to do a 3U
>8 socket server that fits in a standard rack.
| Topic | Posted By | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Barcelona Article Online | David Kanter | 05/16/07 03:20 AM |
| Barcelona Article Online | PiedPiper | 05/16/07 05:12 AM |
| Yes, I left out a sentence there. Fixed (NT) | David Kanter | 05/16/07 12:07 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | anonymous | 05/16/07 06:01 AM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Anonymous | 05/16/07 06:28 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | anonymous | 05/16/07 07:52 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Anonymous1 | 05/16/07 07:08 AM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Dean M | 05/16/07 11:09 AM |
| Barcelona Article Online | David Kanter | 05/16/07 12:38 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Dean M | 05/16/07 02:10 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | IntelUser2000 | 05/16/07 02:59 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Linus Torvalds | 05/16/07 03:24 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | David Kanter | 05/16/07 04:57 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Michael S | 05/17/07 05:07 AM |
| Barcelona Article Online | IntelUser2000 | 05/18/07 08:58 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Doug Siebert | 05/16/07 04:58 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Michael S | 05/17/07 05:20 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Joe Chang | 05/17/07 07:38 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Alex Jones | 05/17/07 09:35 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Jose | 05/23/07 08:23 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Michael S | 05/23/07 11:37 AM |
| 8 socket servers | anonymous | 05/26/07 03:49 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Joe Chang | 05/27/07 01:46 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Doug Siebert | 05/23/07 09:56 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Joe Chang | 05/24/07 04:33 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Anonymous | 05/24/07 11:18 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Doug Siebert | 05/24/07 10:47 PM |
| 8 socket servers | Linus Torvalds | 05/25/07 10:35 AM |
| 8 socket servers | Nick | 05/25/07 02:29 AM |
| Performance estimation seems odd | Hotar | 05/17/07 01:54 AM |
| Performance estimation seems odd | David Kanter | 05/17/07 08:38 AM |
| microops vs macroops on page 4 | Peter Lund | 05/17/07 12:04 PM |
| microops vs macroops on page 4 | David Kanter | 05/21/07 04:51 PM |
| microops vs macroops on page 4 | EduardoS | 05/21/07 05:42 PM |
| microops vs macroops on page 4 | dess | 05/21/07 07:00 PM |
| Barcelona Article Online | Peter Lund | 05/17/07 12:25 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/21/07 07:24 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | David Kanter | 05/21/07 04:38 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/21/07 06:15 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | David Kanter | 05/22/07 12:11 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/22/07 03:56 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | Gipsel | 05/22/07 05:05 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/22/07 05:52 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | anonymous | 05/22/07 06:14 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/22/07 06:44 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | EduardoS | 05/22/07 02:19 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/24/07 08:52 AM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | EduardoS | 05/22/07 02:30 PM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | dess | 05/22/07 04:09 PM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | dess | 05/22/07 04:30 PM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | EduardoS | 05/22/07 04:31 PM |
| Stop comparing... apples to oranges? | dess | 05/24/07 09:30 AM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | anonymous | 05/22/07 08:12 PM |
| Stop comparing apples to oranges | EduardoS | 05/23/07 02:50 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | anonymous | 05/22/07 06:08 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/22/07 06:40 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | anonymous | 05/22/07 06:48 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/21/07 08:30 PM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | anonymous | 05/22/07 06:44 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | dess | 05/24/07 09:38 AM |
| macro-op vs. micro-op | Michael S | 05/22/07 05:26 AM |



