Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

dell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#51

Post by _mvuc »

wtracy wrote: post #17

Are there any ARM servers currently available to Normal People? I got excited when I first saw the headline because the last time I looked I didn't see anything available in the hobbyist/small business price range.

The heck with the prices. They not only won't tell you how much it costs, they will practically come right out and tell you that you, as one of the Great Unwashed, will never be able to buy one of these. Because they won't sell to you, period, for any amount of money, unless you're some kind of incorporated fictional creation that's willing to enter into all kinds of onerous contracts before they're even willing to speak to you further.

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#52

Post by _mvuc »

thu wrote: post #3
rbanffy wrote: post #2

I couldn't find anything on pricing and availability, but, despite my enthusiasm for Windows-proof servers, I am not sure if having a lot of discrete servers in a 3U enclosure is better than having a lot of containers running on, say, 3 1U servers. Containers (or even VMs) are much more manageable than 48 physically distinct machines (to say nothing of having 4 on each board, meaning an upgrade or defect on one means…

It is written "there is no general availability" (even if they are shipping to selected partners).

Me: "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!"

Them: crickets

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#53

Post by voidlogic »

lazyjones wrote: post #47
voidlogic wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Quad socket x86 is still prohibitively expensive Less expensive then a rack of these new ARM blades. Still, lets take quad socket off the table, 4 2U dual socket x86/amd64 boxes still is a better value proposition.

> 4 2U dual socket x86/amd64 boxes still is a better value proposition. Not if you're aiming at a good density (processing power per rack). But there are many blade options (8 boards in 3U, or 4 in 2U from Supermicro e.g.) for x86 that will fit the bill, yes. The cost for the vendor should be much lower with ARM CPUs though (the CPUs will probably be dirt cheap, while Intel's aren't).

>Not if you're aiming at a good density

Context: I'm talking about relative to ARM blades, not denser x86 options.

>The cost for the vendor should be much lower with ARM CPUs though (the CPUs will probably be dirt cheap, while Intel's aren't).

Maybe for the vendor, but these ARM blades boxes are expensive for the consumer!

Lets compare two 2U boxes, one with 48 1.6 GHz ARM SoC and one with dual six-core Xeons with SMT (HT) at lets say 2.8 GHz, that is 48 logical cores. The x86/amd64 box in this comparison is:

  0. Much cheaper!
  1. Low latency at low loads
  2. Similar throughput and latency at high loads
  3. Uses less power
  4. Easier to maintain

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#54

Post by happywolf »

venomsnake wrote: post #35
happywolf wrote: post #19

Given ARM reigns the mobile space, and if it gains traction in the server market, it will put tremendous pressure on the PC market which lies in between.

It won't - it may evolve or change the PC market but it won't pressure it. People will need computing powerhouses and big monitors. My predictions are that we will hit cloud disillusionment soon and people are going to rediscover the benefits of home storage and GPU power.

The issue is CPU no longer is the bottleneck since a while ago. My three-year old laptop with a then high-end graphics card still serves me well. There of course are still some people who need powerful CPUs, but I guess most people will need more powerful GPU instead of CPU.

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#55

Post by ptx »

wtracy wrote: post #40
ptx wrote: post #30

> What is ARM? > An advanced RISC machine (ARM) server employs small, > low-power ARM processors, typically deployed as > systems on a chip (SoC) to reduce space, power consumption > and cost. This looks like a perfect example of the kind of violation a trademark owner is required to pursue to protect the trademark: Dell uses "ARM server" here to mean "a server that is RISC-based and advanced" rather than "a server […

ARM stands for "Advanced RISC Machine". I believe the copy is correct, although I would have expected "advanced RISC machine" to be capitalized as "Advanced RISC Machine" as it refers to a proper name.

That is exactly what I meant. The abbreviation that is the company name used to stand for "Advanced RISC Machines", but "an advanced RISC machine" is clearly a generic description of something that could come from any manufacturer.

As Wikipedia says[1]:

"A trademark which is popularly used to describe a product or service (rather than to distinguish the product or services from those of third parties) is sometimes known as a genericized trademark[2]. If such a mark becomes synonymous with that product or service to the extent that the trademark owner can no longer enforce its proprietary rights, the mark becomes generic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

The point is that "ARM" as it is used in the text doesn't refer specifically to the products of the trademark owner. If such usage becomes acceptable, anyone could sell "ARM servers" and the trademark becomes useless.

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#56

Post by TillE »

dham wrote: post #28

Maybe I'm not opened minded enough, but I just don't believe the future is ARM on the desktop/server. I believe the future is x86 on the phone. I feel like it's less time until Intel gets the power correct as opposed to ARM getting the speed.

Per Geekbench, an iPhone 5S / iPad Air is comparable to a MacBook Pro from 2009, and fully half as fast as some of the very latest laptops.

ARM is already extremely good for mobile applications. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but they certainly seem to be catching up faster than Intel has been able to cut down on power.

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#58

Post by Sssnake »

lazyjones wrote: post #38
voidlogic wrote: post #33

I think x86/amd64 virtualization has made ARM a much less compelling option for servers than what it would have been a few years ago. I'm looking forward to benchmarks of new ARM server CPU (esp. AMDs), but in the past comparing scale out ARM boxes and tradtional servers in the same space has: 1. Been much more more in favor x86/amd64 under low load (much lower latency for users) 2. Been pretty similar under very hig…

> In reality I could fill a rack with these arm blades or have two quad socket x86/amd64 servers be equivalent or better Quad socket x86 is still prohibitively expensive, but in the price per performance assessment you might be right (at least if you do not consider the expensive high-end x86 CPUs). The ARM blades look interesting for bare metal clouds though.

>Quad socket x86 is still prohibitively expensive

What? You can get a 1U, 4x16 core, 256GB server for ten grand. http://www.thinkmate.com/system/a+-server-1042g-tf

Re: Copper enables the ARM server ecosystem

#59

Post by _delirium »

ghostdiver wrote: post #20
zokier wrote: post #9

They left out two most critical bits of info: power consumption and price. You can already get ridiculous amounts of x86 cores in a rack if you want, but those can get pricy to buy and to keep running.

This type of infrastructure is not insta win for many(most.. ?) of businesses. Even if the price will be low and the power consumption will make a difference, still there will be HUGE cost of rewriting software. Not all businesses need to write scalable software, because their current technology stack is just good enough and will always fit to one beefy machine, but on the other hand it will never fit on one ARM serv…

That really depends on what kind of software you're running. There's a wide range of portable C/C++ Unix stuff that compiles fine on ARM. If you run a distro like Debian or ubuntu, you can just install the armhf port and have all that stuff.

Where it gets tricky is if it's something written for an environment that itself has no ARM port yet, such as the JVM.

Post reply on HN