Intel Atom for servers

Seze · October 13, 2010, 05:00:14 PM

I've been using the Intel Atom 230 quite a bit lately in a very small server. It seems to run really well for what I'm using it for (MySQL and Apache). I'm looking to build up a new server build using either the Atom 330 or the Atom D510. I'm really leaning towards the D510, but it would cost an extra $100 USD for the newer D510. Anyone have any thoughts? This is the system I'm looking at btw...

Sіr. Ηaxalot · October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM

Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.

Kerame Pxel Nume · October 13, 2010, 05:47:53 PM

Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM
Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.

In database applications it's not just about system clock but also things like cache sizes. If the caches are smaller it may cause some performance hit.

I consider replacing my current media center system with a Atom+ION system. The atom is fast enough to decode all the existing audio encodings, and video decoding is done by the ION integrated graphics. At only 30W at full load such a system was a lot easier to cool, than my current media center, thus not requiring those audible fans.

Sіr. Ηaxalot · October 14, 2010, 11:56:06 AM

Quote from: Kerame Pxel Nume on October 13, 2010, 05:47:53 PM
Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM
Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.
In database applications it's not just about system clock but also things like cache sizes. If the caches are smaller it may cause some performance hit.

I consider replacing my current media center system with a Atom+ION system. The atom is fast enough to decode all the existing audio encodings, and video decoding is done by the ION integrated graphics. At only 30W at full load such a system was a lot easier to cool, than my current media center, thus not requiring those audible fans.

Yeah, but the cache was the same on both models. Other than price, I couldn't see any difference $:-\$

Seze · October 14, 2010, 12:05:14 PM

Here is a link to the other system that I was looking at. Besides the different Atom processor, the Atom D510 build has some extra features on the Motherboard that might be worth the extra cost, IPMI for instance. Never used IPMI before but it looks interesting, especially for doing KVM over IP stuff...

hawnuyuna'viyä · October 14, 2010, 04:51:52 PM

Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM
Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.

A quick wiki suggests that the D510 and the 330 are not the same frequency (a 70MHz difference!!).
The D510 appears to have a GPU integrated in (increasing power consumption by 5W) - this would explain the price difference (though in raw chip cost it should only be ~$20 difference).

As for which is better, given the very small size of the cache in both, that isn't going to be an effective feature for each, so I would just go for the cheaper 330.

Sіr. Ηaxalot · October 14, 2010, 04:57:55 PM

Quote from: hawnuyu na'viyä on October 14, 2010, 04:51:52 PM
Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM
Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.

A quick wiki suggests that the D510 and the 330 are not the same frequency (a 70MHz difference!!).
The D510 appears to have a GPU integrated in (increasing power consumption by 5W) - this would explain the price difference (though in raw chip cost it should only be ~$20 difference).

As for which is better, given the very small size of the cache in both, that isn't going to be an effective feature for each, so I would just go for the cheaper 330.

70Mhz!! It's going to give just the performance boost to motivate it!

hawnuyuna'viyä · October 14, 2010, 05:01:40 PM

Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 14, 2010, 04:57:55 PM
Quote from: hawnuyu na'viyä on October 14, 2010, 04:51:52 PM
Quote from: Sir. Haxalot on October 13, 2010, 05:17:21 PM
Since both is a DualCore and the same frequency, I would go with the cheaper one, I don't think that they've done any major upgrades that you'll miss out.

A quick wiki suggests that the D510 and the 330 are not the same frequency (a 70MHz difference!!).
The D510 appears to have a GPU integrated in (increasing power consumption by 5W) - this would explain the price difference (though in raw chip cost it should only be ~$20 difference).

As for which is better, given the very small size of the cache in both, that isn't going to be an effective feature for each, so I would just go for the cheaper 330.

70Mhz!! It's going to give just the performance boost to motivate it!

Hmm. Well it would be equivalent to off-loading some of the work to my calculator (75MHz (HP 50g)) - though the IO speeds of doing that could be an issue...

Seze · October 14, 2010, 05:36:23 PM

Yeah the $100 difference for the two processors seems unnecessary but the extra mobo features seem beneficial, IPMI for instance.

bommel · October 15, 2010, 12:44:37 PM

I'm using a Gigabyte GA-D510UD (Atom D510) with Ubuntu server amd64. Installation takes a bit long but after that it runs very well (webserver, ftp, database, mail, samba) and consumes way less power than my previous system (and keeps noise down low). So for "easy" tasks or small sites this is quite good.