Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on August 16, 2014 9:45 am wrote:

>
> As I've said, this is because people keep redefining server to match a certain set of expectations...
> Something like a NAS box is doing what used to be called a server (remember
> "file servers" from the 90s? Maybe you're too young) but while there are some
> Atom powered NAS boxes today, I'd guess that most are ARM powered.
> The same thing is true of communications. You can buy a variety of boxes today that perform
> various parts of "phone to computer via VoIP" internetworking. Some run Asterisk and act as
> the PBX, some do more menial tasks like act as FXO or FXS gateways (basically ethernet on one
> side, traditional phone lines and/or analog handsets on the other side). Once again, most of
> these run ARM. Once again, these types of boxes used to be called "communication" servers.
>
> If your definition of server basically cuts off at higher than the capabilities of whatever
> is the current top of the line ARM CPU, then OF COURSE ARM does not provide servers.
> But that's like defining computers as mainframes, and then missing out on everything
> interesting that's happening, from minis to PCs to laptops to cellphones.

No, it's you who tries to define servers in a way they don't even fit the target for the upcoming ARM server SoCs.

All of those small boxes running NAS duties, Asterisk, low load web servers and what not are not the target of the upcoming ARM server SoCs.
Those boxes are already better served by phone/tablet type SoCs.
Hell, a Rapberri Pi with it's single core ARM11 can do most of that without breaking a sweat.

Those boxes don't need a chip like AMD's A1100: 8 A57 cores, 8 MB L3, dual channel DDR3/4 up to 128 GB, 8x PCIe 3.0, 8x SATA III and 2x 10 GbE.