Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/20/2011 6:24 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: [NOTE: The following is a repost from openindiana list... hoping to gain the benefit of long time experience here as well] Being much a novice in building for a zfs server, I've cobbled up a setup with one of those build it online setups... on ebay this one was. But before I plunge for the green backs. I'd really feel a bit more confident if a few experienced people ran there eye down the lineup and see if anything looks like a deal breaker, or needs changing. It seems like a decent enough price at 1317 (+ Free shipping) but again.. I'm not one who would really know if it was or not. This machine will be used as a home lan zfs server, and will be handling a fair bit of hefty video and other graphic files since I am an amateur videographer and need to save certain elements of my projects for a while after they are sold... A single project can easily run into a 100GB and more... but usually the parts that need saving are more like 50-80 gb. [snip] I'm assuming, by your statement above, that this will be just a file server, and you will only run light interactive (or, at best, infrequent) jobs. [snip] CONFIGURATION PARTS: CPU: AMD 64 CPU AM3 AMD Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2GHz (Six Core) 45nm, AM3 6MB Cache This is way overkill for a home file server, that you aren't doing anything else with. Even with compression turned on, you're not going to be able to stress such a CPU - you'll be disk I/O and network I/O bound long before you hit a CPU issue. Go with something much cheaper. An Athlon II X4 or X3 is a much better choice. You won't need the extra L3 cache of the Phenom. I'd go with a low-end X3 or X4 ($80 or $90, respectively). That saves you over $100. PARTS: Cooling Fans: AMD 64 CPU Fans Coolermaster GeminII S, 5 Copper Heat Pipes, Dual Cooler CPU fan PARTS: Motherboards: AMD 64 AM3 Motherboards GIGABYTE GA-890GPA-UD3H,Onboard Video,HDMI,X-fire,USB 3.0,SATA3,IEEE You won't need CrossFire. Or likely HDMI. Look for a motherboard that has a couple of x8 PCI-E slots, for possible future use of add-in HBAs. But you don't need anything fancier than that. PARTS: Memory: DDR3 Dual Channel memory 16GB (4x4GB) PC10600 DDR3 1333 Dual Channel Get ECC RAM for a ZFS server. Don't skimp - get it. DDR3-1333 is fine, though you might have to use DDR3-1066 for your motherboard when doing ECC. Check your MB manual. Either way, you won't notice the difference. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Erik Trimble writes: First, thanks for the good input >> PARTS: Memory: DDR3 Dual Channel memory >> 16GB (4x4GB) PC10600 DDR3 1333 Dual Channel > Get ECC RAM for a ZFS server. Don't skimp - get it. DDR3-1333 is > fine, though you might have to use DDR3-1066 for your motherboard when > doing ECC. Check your MB manual. Either way, you won't notice the > difference. I've asked this in another thread, but since you mention it here maybe if you are willing, I could get a brief notion from you as to what it means to use ECC or not. And the relationship of buffered/unbuffered. In the specs of memory... its quite confusing how that kind of stuff is listed if you don't now poop about what it really means. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
First off, thanks for the good input. And excuse the little post inbetween asking about ECC and Buffering. I'd still like to hear your comments but I did find what appears to be an excellent (not so technical) discussion of about those point here: http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/RAM.htm Now, let me also say that some of the changes you recommend would mean that I would not be able to use the Build it online system where I did the system we are discussing. Changes are possible but only within what is probably quite a narrow range compared to what is available. So to get to the main changes... I'd need to build it myself or pay someone to build it who would allow me to say what hardware would be used in all aspects. I am a bit reluctant to build it myself. I spent a lifetime either doing high rigging where we handled 1 1/2 inch cabling and bigger to move 100 ton pieces around or doing heavy duty welding where 1/2 plate would be about the lightest I'd be likely to work with. All that to say my hands are not accustomed to doing fine work so I suspect I'd break something or run into problems I don't now how to solve and end up taking a good long time to get a system built. Erik Trimble writes: [...] >> This machine will be used as a home lan zfs server, and will be >> handling a fair bit of hefty video and other graphic files since I am >> an amateur videographer and need to save certain elements of my >> projects for a while after they are sold... A single project can >> easily run into a 100GB and more... but usually the parts that need >> saving are more like 50-80 gb. >> > [snip] > > I'm assuming, by your statement above, that this will be just a file > server, and you will only run light interactive (or, at best, > infrequent) jobs. I would probably do a project on a zfs share as much as possible. I guess that falls into `light interactive' since it would be at most 2 people working that way. The rest would be all file serving and storage. > [snip] >> CONFIGURATION >> >> PARTS: CPU: AMD 64 CPU AM3 >> AMD Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2GHz (Six Core) 45nm, AM3 6MB >> Cache > This is way overkill for a home file server, that you aren't doing > anything else with. Even with compression turned on, you're not going > to be able to stress such a CPU - you'll be disk I/O and network I/O > bound long before you hit a CPU issue. > > Go with something much cheaper. An Athlon II X4 or X3 is a much > better choice. You won't need the extra L3 cache of the Phenom. I'd > go with a low-end X3 or X4 ($80 or $90, respectively). That saves you > over $100. That is one change that can be done on the system I used on ebay. >> PARTS: Cooling Fans: AMD 64 CPU Fans >> Coolermaster GeminII S, 5 Copper Heat Pipes, Dual Cooler CPU >> fan >> >> PARTS: Motherboards: AMD 64 AM3 Motherboards >> GIGABYTE GA-890GPA-UD3H,Onboard Video,HDMI,X-fire,USB >> 3.0,SATA3,IEEE > You won't need CrossFire. Or likely HDMI. Look for a motherboard that > has a couple of x8 PCI-E slots, for possible future use of add-in > HBAs. But you don't need anything fancier than that. There is a limited range of Mobo available. You'll notice this particular one has `onboard' video so I assumed then I would not get any other specialized video card at all, just use the onboard options. Also some of the boards available, only allow 8gb ram. There are 26 motherboards available to swap around with, x8 pci-e is not available on the 8-9 that I looked at. Is that something that is commonly available? Oh, and what are HBAs? Googling turns up way too many possibilities. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
I'd recommend something like the HP Proliant Microserver that holds four drives. 8Gb RAM should be sufficient for your needs since you aren't using deduplication or if you are it's not likely to be an issue for the size of your pools. -Gary ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Hi Harryp, The motherboard you listed (GIGABYTE GA-890GPA-UD3H) does not support ECC type memory. So to follow Erik's guidance to use ECC ram you would have to find a different motherboard that does support ECC type memory. see: Memory supported non-ECC http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3342#sp Hope that helps. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Andre Lue writes: > Hi Harryp, > > The motherboard you listed (GIGABYTE GA-890GPA-UD3H) does not support > ECC type memory. So to follow Erik's guidance to use ECC ram you would > have to find a different motherboard that does support ECC type > memory. Thanks for the info. > see: Memory supported non-ECC > http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3342#sp That helped find something on the build list: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3674 But it still specifies unbuffered. Does that matter so much. I've read in other posts what it means and I understood it to mean that the data is buffered before release. What actually happens during that buffering... I'm not so sure. Some good news is that apparently both of the 16 gb memory sets appear to offer both ECC and NON-ecc. Maybe you can say if that is what it means here: http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3572 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Gary Driggs writes: > I'd recommend something like the HP Proliant Microserver that holds > four drives. 8Gb RAM should be sufficient for your needs since you > aren't using deduplication or if you are it's not likely to be an > issue for the size of your pools. Thanks, Just a quick look around it appears to be about the same money for a new one, as I posted, but less machine, and if I tried to use my existing 4 @ 500GB + 2 @ 750GB drives. The best combination I'd get would be about 1200GB (mirrored). and leave 2 disks unused. If I bought bigger disks then the price shoots up a bit. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/21/11 11:38 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: That helped find something on the build list: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3674 But it still specifies unbuffered. Does that matter so much. I've read in other posts what it means and I understood it to mean that the data is buffered before release. What actually happens during that buffering... I'm not so sure. Hardly any consumer boards support ECC memory because their chip-sets don't support it. The main external difference between buffered and unbuffered ECC memory is the load each DIMM puts on the memory buses. In simple terms, you can fit a lot more buffered DIMS. Some good news is that apparently both of the 16 gb memory sets appear to offer both ECC and NON-ecc. Maybe you can say if that is what it means here: http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3572 Almost certainly non-ECC only. Otherwise they would say. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: > ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video That's basically the same what I use. ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) It works pretty well except for the onboard graphics -- see the mailing list for my questions about it. PS: Wikipedia is usually pretty good at explaining stuff like ECC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_RAM ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Claus Assmann writes: > On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: > >> ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video > > That's basically the same what I use. > ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) Ahh great... good to hear from someone who speaks from experience. So at least we know ECC is available for that board. Still not sure how to get the builders to use that but I suspect I'll have to track them down and get an oral promise. But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: 1 x PCIe 2.0 x16 2 x PCIe 2.0 x1 1 x PCI But I found another one on this builders list that appears to have ECC and better expansion slots: Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board has the same notation as the other one: "4 x DIMM, Max. 16 GB, DDR3 2000(O.C.)/1333/1066 ECC,Non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory" ASUS M4A89GTD PRO,890GX http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3525 And it has a better expansion setup: 2 x PCIe 2.0 x16 support ATI CrossFireX™ technology(@dual x8 speed) 1 x PCIe 2.0 x4 1 x PCIe 2.0 x1 2 x PCI ---- ---=--- - Claus Wrote: > It works pretty well except for the onboard graphics -- see > the mailing list for my questions about it. I wondered about that onboard video... Which mailing list do you mean, an asus list? > PS: Wikipedia is usually pretty good at explaining stuff like ECC > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_RAM You are right there, I was a lazy slug but really just had a mental senior moment I guess because when I googled it, one of the first things that caught my eye turned out to be what seems really excellent for some one with my lack of knowledge: http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/RAM.htm (in case another dimwit is following this) PS - Is this the same Claus who over the years has answered many of my sendmail questions too? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/21/11 02:43 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Claus Assmann writes: On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video That's basically the same what I use. ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) Ahh great... good to hear from someone who speaks from experience. So at least we know ECC is available for that board. Still not sure how to get the builders to use that but I suspect I'll have to track them down and get an oral promise. But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: 1 x PCIe 2.0 x16 2 x PCIe 2.0 x1 1 x PCI But I found another one on this builders list that appears to have ECC and better expansion slots: Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board has the same notation as the other one: All I said was if they don't say ECC is supported, it isn't! In this case, they do. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/20/2011 6:09 PM, Ian Collins wrote: On 02/21/11 02:43 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Claus Assmann writes: On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video That's basically the same what I use. ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) Ahh great... good to hear from someone who speaks from experience. So at least we know ECC is available for that board. Still not sure how to get the builders to use that but I suspect I'll have to track them down and get an oral promise. But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: 1 x PCIe 2.0 x16 2 x PCIe 2.0 x1 1 x PCI But I found another one on this builders list that appears to have ECC and better expansion slots: Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board has the same notation as the other one: All I said was if they don't say ECC is supported, it isn't! In this case, they do. Actually, most sites lie to you about ECC support for socket AM3 motherboards. You need to look at the Manufacturer's site, and get the manual for the actual motherboard model. ALL Athlon/Phenom CPUs support ECC RAM (it's a function of the memory controller built into the CPU), and unless the motherboard manufacturer does something really, really stupid, the motherboard will to. In fact, the MB manufacturer has to go out of their way to break ECC support - it's cheaper just to leave things be, and support ECC, than it is to NOT support ECC on an AM3 motherboard. The catch here is that they support BOTH ECC and non-ECC RAM, so most sites see the "supports non-ECC" and assume it doesn't also support ECC (Intel still has an either/or requirement, while AMD can do both). For Socket AM3 motherboards, you want unbuffered, non-registered ECC. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Eric, Intel Sandybridge, does it support ECC? I heard that Intel does not allow hardware targeted to home users support ECC. Only server stuff supports ECC. Ive heard. Do you know anything about Intel stuff in general? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/21/11 09:56 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: Eric, Intel Sandybridge, does it support ECC? I heard that Intel does not allow hardware targeted to home users support ECC. Only server stuff supports ECC. http://www.evga.com/support/motherboard/ The eVGA X58 motherboards allow Xeon CPUs with ECC memory. I believe the Mac Pro also uses Xeon with ECC. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Feb 21, 2011, at 6:56 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > Intel Sandybridge, does it support ECC? Yes but not in every processor... http://embedded.communities.intel.com/community/en/rovingreporter/blog/2010/12/14/roving-reporter-sandy-bridge-features-will-match-embedded-application-requirements ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: > > ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) > But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that > it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: Get the full-sized version (not "-M": Micro), it has more expansion slots. > > It works pretty well except for the onboard graphics -- see > > the mailing list for my questions about it. > I wondered about that onboard video... > Which mailing list do you mean, an asus list? This list, Message-ID: <20101215022203.ga8...@quiet.esmtp.org> > PS - Is this the same Claus who over the years has answered many of my > sendmail questions too? Probably. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/21/2011 8:37 AM, Gary Driggs wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 6:56 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: Intel Sandybridge, does it support ECC? Yes but not in every processor... http://embedded.communities.intel.com/community/en/rovingreporter/blog/2010/12/14/roving-reporter-sandy-bridge-features-will-match-embedded-application-requirements ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Here's how Intel does product differentiation: If the product is an "iN" something or other (e.g. i3/i5/i7 or the like), regardless of the underlying architecture, the memory controller DOES NOT support ECC. If the product is labeled "Xeon" something or other, it DOES support ECC. Remember that "Sandy Bridge" is a new microarchitecture design, so there will be multiple different CPU lines coming out using it. There will be i7, Xeon 5000-series, and Xeon 7000-series CPUs using the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. The exact features of each vary (you'll have to look at Intel's site for more info. I prefer to use http://ark.intel.com ) So, may very well have a case where a specific Intel motherboard will support both a i7 and Xeon CPU, but only be able to use ECC with the Xeon. All this is a side effect of moving the memory controller into the CPU die, and out of the Northbridge chipset. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Ian Collins writes: >> Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board has the same >> notation as the other one: > > All I said was if they don't say ECC is supported, it isn't! In this > case, they do. Ian, I'm the source of the problem on this. Your earlier comment was made about a board that says the exact same thing as the board referred to in my para above. So I thought you were saying that even though there is some comment about ECC, doesn't mean they actually support it. But the rub comes in that on that earlier message you were responding to the first time, I put the WRONG URL for that board, so if you looked at that URL thinking it was the board I meant... then on that board there is no mention of ECC , | From previous post: | Message-ID: <87k4gus568@newsguy.com> | | That helped find something on the build list: | | ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video | | http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3674 | | But it still specifies unbuffered. Does that matter so much. ` I cited an Asus board but the URL below it is an MSI board. Sorry to confuse things. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Claus Assmann writes: > On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: > >> > ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) > >> But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that >> it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: > > Get the full-sized version (not "-M": Micro), it has more expansion > slots. > >> > It works pretty well except for the onboard graphics -- see >> > the mailing list for my questions about it. > >> I wondered about that onboard video... >> Which mailing list do you mean, an asus list? > > This list, > Message-ID: <20101215022203.ga8...@quiet.esmtp.org> Oh, I see it now. The thread ends December 22nd... did you find out if it was the builtin Graphics for sure since then? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Haryy, ECC RAM is a 'nice to have' if this is a PRO server - but not critical for home use/SOHO use. The main thing to consider is you can build a very good dedicated NAS server for around $800 USD that can provide you with up to 8TB-12TB w/2TB drives). If you have a good computer builder, they can design you something very nice within a decent price range scalable up to 8TB-12TB (most designs) and small enough in a mini-tower. You should not have to spend over $1000 for a good design with high-quality customized parts for just a ZFS NAS server in today's market. You can spend less with a dedicated predesigned commercial unit... ~ Ken Mays --- On Mon, 2/21/11, Harry Putnam wrote: > From: Harry Putnam > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post > To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Date: Monday, February 21, 2011, 3:29 PM > Ian Collins > writes: > > >> Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board > has the same > >> notation as the other one: > > > > All I said was if they don't say ECC is supported, it > isn't! In this > > case, they do. > > Ian, I'm the source of the problem on this. > > Your earlier comment was made about a board that says the > exact same > thing as the board referred to in my para above. > > So I thought you were saying that even though there is some > comment > about ECC, doesn't mean they actually support it. > > But the rub comes in that on that earlier message you were > responding > to the first time, I put the WRONG URL for that board, so > if you > looked at that URL thinking it was the board I meant... > then on that > board there is no mention of ECC > > , > | From previous post: > | Message-ID: <87k4gus568@newsguy.com> > | > | That helped find something on the build list: > | > | ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video > | > | http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3674 > | > | But it still specifies unbuffered. Does that matter > so much. > ` > > I cited an Asus board but the URL below it is an MSI > board. > > Sorry to confuse things. > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
ken mays writes: > Haryy, > > ECC RAM is a 'nice to have' if this is a PRO server - but not critical for > home use/SOHO use. > > The main thing to consider is you can build a very good dedicated NAS > server for around $800 USD that can provide you with up to 8TB-12TB > w/2TB drives). > > If you have a good computer builder, they can design you something > very nice within a decent price range scalable up to 8TB-12TB (most > designs) and > small enough in a mini-tower. You should not have to spend over $1000 > for a good design with high-quality customized parts for just a ZFS > NAS server in today's market. Do you have any ideas how to connect with such a builder? So far, I've only looked at a couple of those build it online type sites where they allow you to pick parts from a list they have. The one where I quoted the price 1300+ was found on ebay called magic-micro. I have no connection with them or any special reason to think they are particularly `good', its just one that I found by accidentally scrolling further down a ebay page than usual and happend to notice a `Customize it' link. And I gradually gravitated toward the higher end stuff, as my eyes got bigger :). They had plenty of various brand amd quads too, not just the 6 core phenom setup I picked. I would really like to hear from someone with personal experience with a builder available on line that would be knowledgeable of solaris and zfs and the necessary hardware. > You can spend less with a dedicated predesigned commercial unit... Can you name a few? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/22/11 11:11 AM, ken mays wrote: Haryy, ECC RAM is a 'nice to have' if this is a PRO server - but not critical for home use/SOHO use. The picture is different for a ZFS server. Lesser filesystems will silently ignore corruptions cased by a memory error. ZFS will not. If your data has any value, the small additional cost of ECC RAM is cheap insurance! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Harry Putnam wrote: >> You can spend less with a dedicated predesigned commercial unit... > Can you name a few? I didn't catch how many drives you said you needed. And was it this thread that I already responded to -- have you looked at the HP Proliant Microserver (N36L)? It holds four drives, up to 8Gb ECC RAM, and has very low power consumption. And there's no assembly required except for buying the bard drives and installing them on the sleds. I think this would be an ideal small/home office server. Just remember that you won't need to configure the RAID controller because that'll be taken care of by ZFS. -Gary ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Thanks. Exactly the kind of info I wanted. This means I have to buy a Xeon grade Sandy Bridge, which sucks. I would prefer a cheap i5/whatever. AMD's new Bulldozer with graphics-on-die, does support ECC, but is not an option to me, because I want 3D graphics. Oracle is not supporting AMD cpus anymore, which means there will be no 3D graphics drivers for AMDs Bulldozer. I dont think anyone else will release Solaris 3D graphics drivers for AMD Bulldozer. Maybe I should just discard the ECC ram thing and use normal RAM for my Sandybridge. :o( -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Feb 22, 2011 Orvar Korvar wrote: > This means I have to buy a Xeon grade Sandy Bridge, which sucks. I would > prefer a cheap i5/whatever. Actually, the mobile core i5-2515E & i7-2715QE will allegedly include ECC RAM support so don't be surprised if some desktop class CPUs will also. -Gary ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/22/2011 6:00 AM, Gary Driggs wrote: On Feb 22, 2011 Orvar Korvar wrote: This means I have to buy a Xeon grade Sandy Bridge, which sucks. I would prefer a cheap i5/whatever. Actually, the mobile core i5-2515E& i7-2715QE will allegedly include ECC RAM support so don't be surprised if some desktop class CPUs will also. -Gary I highly doubt Intel will do this. There's no technical reason not to, but it's a product-line differentiator for them. They could do it now, but don't, and I can't see any reason for them to change their behavior. Remember that a i7 and a Xeon 5xxx are effectively identical CPUs (even today), except for the fact that the Xeons have an ECC-enabled Memory controller. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/22/2011 4:04 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: Thanks. Exactly the kind of info I wanted. This means I have to buy a Xeon grade Sandy Bridge, which sucks. I would prefer a cheap i5/whatever. AMD's new Bulldozer with graphics-on-die, does support ECC, but is not an option to me, because I want 3D graphics. Oracle is not supporting AMD cpus anymore, which means there will be no 3D graphics drivers for AMDs Bulldozer. I dont think anyone else will release Solaris 3D graphics drivers for AMD Bulldozer. Maybe I should just discard the ECC ram thing and use normal RAM for my Sandybridge. :o( If you care about 3D, don't use the Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer on-die GPUs. Get a add-in graphics card. They're better supported all around. Both AMD and (particularly) Nvidia have good Solaris drivers for most of their add-in card product line nowdays. I can't speak officially for Oracle, but I don't see good support for even the integrated GPU in a Sandy Bridge as getting much traction (and support) from Oracle Solaris. There's very little reason for Oracle to spend the time to add the support (after all, its not like Oracle sells Workstations anymore, and even their Solaris OEM agreements with people like HP are for servers, not desktops). -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/22/11 07:47 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: > If you care about 3D, don't use the Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer on-die GPUs. > Get > a add-in graphics card. They're better supported all around. Both AMD and > (particularly) Nvidia have good Solaris drivers for most of their add-in card > product line nowdays. No, mostly just nvidia. For AMD/ATI we currently only just pass through the open source 2D driver, without the support provided by the DRI driver in other OS'es for Kernel Modesetting (KMS) or hardware acceleration. -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/22/2011 8:28 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 02/22/11 07:47 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: If you care about 3D, don't use the Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer on-die GPUs. Get a add-in graphics card. They're better supported all around. Both AMD and (particularly) Nvidia have good Solaris drivers for most of their add-in card product line nowdays. No, mostly just nvidia. For AMD/ATI we currently only just pass through the open source 2D driver, without the support provided by the DRI driver in other OS'es for Kernel Modesetting (KMS) or hardware acceleration Thanks for the correction, Alan. I had thought we'd added support for KMS, but, obviously, you know better than I. :-) -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Feb 22, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: > On 2/22/2011 6:00 AM, Gary Driggs wrote: >> On Feb 22, 2011 Orvar Korvar wrote: >>> This means I have to buy a Xeon grade Sandy Bridge, which sucks. I would >>> prefer a cheap i5/whatever. >> Actually, the mobile core i5-2515E& i7-2715QE will allegedly include ECC >> RAM support so don't be surprised if some desktop class CPUs will also. >> >> -Gary > > I highly doubt Intel will do this. There's no technical reason not to, but > it's a product-line differentiator for them. They could do it now, but don't, > and I can't see any reason for them to change their behavior. > > Remember that a i7 and a Xeon 5xxx are effectively identical CPUs (even > today), except for the fact that the Xeons have an ECC-enabled Memory > controller. > > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/22/11 08:46 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: > On 2/22/2011 8:28 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: >> On 02/22/11 07:47 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: >>> If you care about 3D, don't use the Sandy Bridge or Bulldozer on-die GPUs. >>> Get >>> a add-in graphics card. They're better supported all around. Both AMD and >>> (particularly) Nvidia have good Solaris drivers for most of their add-in >>> card >>> product line nowdays. >> No, mostly just nvidia. For AMD/ATI we currently only just pass through the >> open source 2D driver, without the support provided by the DRI driver in >> other >> OS'es for Kernel Modesetting (KMS) or hardware acceleration > Thanks for the correction, Alan. > > I had thought we'd added support for KMS, but, obviously, you know better > than I. Not for AMD/ATI. KMS is work in progress for Intel graphics (a joint project of Intel & Oracle, part of our ongoing partnership), but not yet integrated, nor has any KMS support for anything but Intel graphics been done. -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Feb 22, 2011, Erik Trimble wrote: > I highly doubt Intel will do this. There's no technical reason not to, but > it's a product-line differentiator for them. Have a look & note that these are mobile procs, not "desktop" procs... http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54643&code=i3-2310E http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54647&code=i5-2515E http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54644&code=i7-2715QE -Gary ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/22/2011 9:33 AM, Gary wrote: On Feb 22, 2011, Erik Trimble wrote: I highly doubt Intel will do this. There's no technical reason not to, but it's a product-line differentiator for them. Have a look& note that these are mobile procs, not "desktop" procs... http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54643&code=i3-2310E http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54647&code=i5-2515E http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=54644&code=i7-2715QE -Gary *Exactly* - mobile, not desktop. You can't put these CPUs in a normal desktop motherboard (different socket). These CPUs are specifically made for the "mobile workstation laptop" market. Think of these as "Xeon for Laptops". Intel is the king of product differentiation. And, hairsplitting. If there's some way of making a buck for any minor feature, Intel's on top of it. Consequently, TANSTAAFL with Intel - if you want ECC on the desktop, well, you buy a Xeon CPU. And pay for it. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
I think it really matters what you're using it for. If you look around on AMD's site you'll see some mention of ECC being important for embedded applications now as well but I have to agree that most desktop users aren't going to care one way or another... "Does either the Intel Core i7 processor or the Intel Core i5 processor family support Error Correction Code (ECC) memory? Neither family of desktop processors supports ECC memory. Typically ECC memory is used on servers and workstations rather than on desktop platforms. This is due to the price premium and extremely low likelihood of a data error occurring even on memory not utilizing ECC." http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/CS-029913.htm "ECC memory support for low end SOHO server applications and applications requiring reliable data or minimum down time." http://www.amd.com/pl/products/embedded/processors/Pages/socket-am3.aspx ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Gary writes: > Harry Putnam wrote: >>> You can spend less with a dedicated predesigned commercial unit... >> Can you name a few? > > I didn't catch how many drives you said you needed. And was it this > thread that I already responded to -- I'll use 8 drives if I want to use what I already have on a dysfunctional zfs server 2@500 (ide [pata] 2@500sataII 2@750sata) I expected to buy a pair of 1TB drives. I've been running in a mirrored setup so need 2X whatever drives I use. I could buy bigger disks but of course, that would mean letting 6drives I already have just set around. If I bought 4 2tb drives I'd have about the same capacity but it would cost around $400 (or is it cheaper for 4 2tb drivs?) One tempting thing about the Proliant Microserver N36L, It can be gotten damned cheap if this is the one you mean: http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?edc=2190307#TS ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
I thought 3D driver for Sandbybridge was on it's way? I dont need excellent 3D performance, just so I can see 1080p video, use Compiz, play old games in Wine/VirtualBox, such as Starcraft 1, Diablo 2, etc. I hope in this case, I do not need Nvidia graphics card. Now, I have a ATI4850 and the 2D driver is not really good, I can not playback 1080p video - that is impossible because of huge lag. I want to build a Solaris PC with low power requirements. Sandybridge/Ivybridge with one SSD and no discrete graphics card. I suspect this config will idle at ~50Watt and still provide plenty of cpu power, but low 3D performance. Which is perfect for a SunRay server. Maybe I should settle for Ivy Bridge, which should have the same 3D graphics driver, I hope. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Hi Harry, 1. Use only a 64-bit processor for your ZFS unit. 2. ECC RAM requires a compatible motherboard/chipset/processor. It is not a 'simple' investment...its a serious one in considered your overall hardware components. It is not a critical must-have-it concern for home use (IMHO), but if you get it then best make sure your hardware is using it properly and supports it if this is your more serious work/SOHO NAS unit. Good luck! ~ Ken Mays --- On Wed, 2/23/11, Harry Putnam wrote: > From: Harry Putnam > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post > To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Date: Wednesday, February 23, 2011, 12:54 AM > Gary > writes: > > > Harry Putnam wrote: > >>> You can spend less with a dedicated > predesigned commercial unit... > >> Can you name a few? > > > > I didn't catch how many drives you said you needed. > And was it this > > thread that I already responded to -- > > I'll use 8 drives if I want to use what I already have on > a > dysfunctional zfs server 2@500 (ide [pata] 2@500sataII > 2@750sata) > > I expected to buy a pair of 1TB drives. I've been > running in a > mirrored setup so need 2X whatever drives I use. > > I could buy bigger disks but of course, that would mean > letting 6drives > I already have just set around. > > If I bought 4 2tb drives I'd have about the same capacity > but it would > cost around $400 (or is it cheaper for 4 2tb drivs?) > > One tempting thing about the Proliant Microserver N36L, It > can be > gotten damned cheap if this is the one you mean: > > http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?edc=2190307#TS > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/23/11 02:56 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > I thought 3D driver for Sandbybridge was on it's way? Unlike the nvidia driver, which is available for download separate from the OS, the Intel 3D driver is only available as part of the OS, so any updates for it for Oracle Solaris 11 will come in future releases, since development builds are not generally available. -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/23/11 12:46 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 02/23/11 02:56 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: I thought 3D driver for Sandbybridge was on it's way? Unlike the nvidia driver, which is available for download separate from the OS, Minor nit. The driver available for download from nvidia.com currently lacks some enhancements/fixes available in the bundled driver (MSI, fastreboot, ...). For example, the GT 220, et. al., fix went into the bundled 260.19.29 driver in build 156 but was not available from nvidia.com until the 270.26 beta driver release this week. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
I just want an integrated 3D in a cpu that can give me 1080p, Compiz, simple games in Wine/VirtualBox, etc. It is not really important to me if I get updates to a 3D driver, as long as it gives me the above. I hope Sandybridge would give me this? What do you think, should the Solarsi 3D driver for Sandybridge be able to give me all this? Never mind frequent updates... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > I just want an integrated 3D in a cpu that can give me 1080p, Compiz, simple > games in Wine/VirtualBox, etc. It is not really important to me if I get > updates to a 3D driver, as long as it gives me the above. I hope Sandybridge > would give me this? What do you think, should the Solarsi 3D driver for > Sandybridge be able to give me all this? Never mind frequent updates... Yes, most Intel integrated graphics chips from the past few years (with the notable exception of the GMA 500) should be fine for Compiz, HD video playback, and some games. Wine's Direct3D-on-GL implementation tends to depend on features not present in the Intel drivers, though. -Albert ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/23/11 12:20 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > I just want an integrated 3D in a cpu that can give me 1080p, Compiz, simple > games in Wine/VirtualBox, etc. It is not really important to me if I get > updates to a 3D driver, as long as it gives me the above. I hope Sandybridge > would give me this? What do you think, should the Solarsi 3D driver for > Sandybridge be able to give me all this? Never mind frequent updates... I don't know, since that driver isn't available yet, so all we can do here is guess & speculate. I also don't know when it will be available to end-users (and since it won't be until a future release, probably couldn't say even if I did know, since I am not authorized to be announcing future OS release dates to the public). -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/23/2011 12:20 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: I just want an integrated 3D in a cpu that can give me 1080p, Compiz, simple games in Wine/VirtualBox, etc. It is not really important to me if I get updates to a 3D driver, as long as it gives me the above. I hope Sandybridge would give me this? What do you think, should the Solarsi 3D driver for Sandybridge be able to give me all this? Never mind frequent updates... Oscar, What's driving your SandyBridge desire? Given that S-B is just starting to ship now, you'll pay a premium to get it, vs any older CPU. Given what you've previously described your usage is: Quote: "I thought 3D driver for Sandbybridge was on it's way? I dont need excellent 3D performance, just so I can see 1080p video, use Compiz, play old games in Wine/VirtualBox, such as Starcraft 1, Diablo 2, etc. I hope in this case, I do not need Nvidia graphics card. Now, I have a ATI4850 and the 2D driver is not really good, I can not playback 1080p video - that is impossible because of huge lag. I want to build a Solaris PC with low power requirements. Sandybridge/Ivybridge with one SSD and no discrete graphics card. I suspect this config will idle at ~50Watt and still provide plenty of cpu power, but low 3D performance. Which is perfect for a SunRay server. Maybe I should settle for Ivy Bridge, which should have the same 3D graphics driver, I hope." I'd actually recommend something like an "Energy-Efficient" version of an Athlon II and a motherboard with integrated nVidia graphics. Something like this: AMD Athlon II X3 400e (2.2Ghz, 45W thermal, triple-core, Socket AM3)$100 AMD Athlon II X4 615e (2.5Ghz, 45W thermal, quad-core, Socket AM3) $150 MSI NF750-G55 motherboard $85 (http://us.msi.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=1&prod_no=1879) It's better supported under Solaris now, and should fit your needs easily. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Erik, What is driving my Sandybridge desire is I want to build a SunRay server for home use, also doubling as a ZFS file server, and some simple gaming. If I can replace all computers at home, with SunRays I have saved power. Say each PC uses 100 watt at idle, that could be 300Watt at idle. If I replace them with a SunRay server that idles at 50watt, I have saved lots of power. I want the server to be powerful, but excellent graphics performance is not important, but I want rudimentary graphics ability: 1080p, Compiz, etc. Sandybridge is powerful CPU, so I can do some heavy compilations and development, and also SunRay will benefit from powerful CPU. I also want a ZFS server (the raid discs are normally powered off) I suspect a Sandybridge with integrated graphics is powerful and idles at 50watt. AMD with separate graphics card is not as powerful as Sandybridge, and uses lots of power. AMD bulldozer could be an option, but then I need a discrete graphics card that sucks up lots of power - so Bulldozer is not an alternative. Maybe OpenIndiana/Illumos/someone else could build an open sourced 3D graphics driver for Bulldozer? That would be perfect, but probably it will not happen. So, in my eyes Sandybridge gives lot of cpu power and rudimentary 3D graphics and use little power - perfect for SunRay server. I dont see any other option than Sandybridge? Price is not that important, I am willing to pay a premium. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/24/11 06:50 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: If I can replace all computers at home, with SunRays I have saved power. Say each PC uses 100 watt at idle, that could be 300Watt at idle. If I replace them with a SunRay server that idles at 50watt, I have saved lots of power. I want the server to be powerful, but excellent graphics performance is not important, but I want rudimentary graphics ability: 1080p, Compiz, etc. Sandybridge is powerful CPU, so I can do some heavy compilations and development, and also SunRay will benefit from powerful CPU. While I'm a big fan of deploying SunRays, there are lower power alternatives to 100W PCs for running compiz. My Atom N330 + ION brick (ASRock ION 330) runs Solaris 11 Express + compiz just fine and rarely every budges above 25W with an active desktop. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Dual core Atom systems make for quite usable desktops -- even when playing video. Here's a Shuttle PC nettop with 40W power supply that I have in my home office with MeeGo Linux and is ready to use in 30 seconds from a full power on; http://us.shuttle.com/X350.aspx I haven't had a chance to try any Solaris derivatives on it yet... -Gary ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Orvar, You can actually do this today using the previous Intel integrated GPUs. The Intel GMA HD (i.e. Intel Clarkdale/Arrandale-based) series works well enough for basic 3D work with the current drivers available under OI_148a and Solaris 11 Express. As for 1080p 2D playback, Compiz, Wine 1.3.14/VirtualBox, there are limiting performance factors based on current DMA and driver updates. The Intel GMA HD GPUs work fine otherwise with 1080p video playback and Compiz. Note: I originally tested OpenIndiana_147 on a Intel Brookdale (i.e. i845G) GPU and using Compiz 0.8.4 and DVD video playback. Worked pretty well within the chip's limitations and I tested on a 1280x1024 display monitor. Most Compiz/3D features worked. As for official SandyBridge GPU driver support, best use a Nvidia GPU card as a workaround. Hope that helped a bit, Ken Mays --- On Wed, 2/23/11, Orvar Korvar wrote: > From: Orvar Korvar > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post > To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Date: Wednesday, February 23, 2011, 3:20 PM > I just want an integrated 3D in a cpu > that can give me 1080p, Compiz, simple games in > Wine/VirtualBox, etc. It is not really important to me if I > get updates to a 3D driver, as long as it gives me the > above. I hope Sandybridge would give me this? What do you > think, should the Solarsi 3D driver for Sandybridge be able > to give me all this? Never mind frequent updates... > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Thanks for the tips, but I also need to do heavy development and run heavy calculations. So I need a beefy CPU above all. But I prefer if it has low power requirements. That is the reason Sandybridge is what I prefer. I have to wait and see how the 3D graphics driver turns out -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/24/11 03:14 PM, Orvar Korvar wrote: Thanks for the tips, but I also need to do heavy development and run heavy calculations. So I need a beefy CPU above all. But I prefer if it has low power requirements. That is the reason Sandybridge is what I prefer. I have to wait and see how the 3D graphics driver turns out What's the objective definition of beefy? Intel Arrandale CULV + ION might offers a bit more CPU + memory for a bit more power above Atom (18W for the CPU package). The HTPC market is making many low power configs available. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Actually, take note that heavy calculations are offloaded to GPUs or specialized hardware nowadays. Many ways to skin something ~ Ken Mays --- On Thu, 2/24/11, Orvar Korvar wrote: > From: Orvar Korvar > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post > To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Date: Thursday, February 24, 2011, 3:14 PM > Thanks for the tips, but I also need > to do heavy development and run heavy calculations. So I > need a beefy CPU above all. But I prefer if it has low power > requirements. > > That is the reason Sandybridge is what I prefer. I have to > wait and see how the 3D graphics driver turns out > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/24/2011 3:43 PM, ken mays wrote: Actually, take note that heavy calculations are offloaded to GPUs or specialized hardware nowadays. Many ways to skin something ~ Ken Mays --- On Thu, 2/24/11, Orvar Korvar wrote: From: Orvar Korvar Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Date: Thursday, February 24, 2011, 3:14 PM Thanks for the tips, but I also need to do heavy development and run heavy calculations. So I need a beefy CPU above all. But I prefer if it has low power requirements. That is the reason Sandybridge is what I prefer. I have to wait and see how the 3D graphics driver turns out -- Also, I just looked, and you're not going to find a SandyBridge-based i7 that is under a 65W TDP profile. That's the i7-2600S (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52215), which runs about $400. If you want under 65W and a SandyBridge, you have to step down to the i5. Specifically, the i5-2500T (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52212) for $270 does 45W. The i7 will significantly out-perform anything else available. But, a SandyBridge i5 won't. It won't be noticeably faster than the last-gen Clarksdale i5, or the various current-gen Athlon II Also, remember, that practically all modern CPUs will idle down significantly when not under load. So, the max TDP of a CPU will be significantly more than actually consumed most of the time. For this reason, I'd look at Clarksdale-based i5 and Athlon II X4 systems with a higher TDP than 45W, and consider that they don't actually pull what they indicate. Similarly, while the nVidia gtx 460 is going to pull 200W at top rev, a modest nVidia gtx 240 might pull 40W under max load, and a quarter of that (or less) when doing 2D. One last thing: DDR RAM power consumption is non-trivial these days. Specifically, DDR2 w/ ECC is going to consume less power than DDR3 (even non-ECC), by 15% or more. So, if you really care about that, a 65W Athlon II using DDR2 RAM with ECC may very well pull similar power to a 45W SandyBridge w/ DDR3, under most load situations. The sad fact right now is that the integrated video of the SandyBridge isn't supported. It may very well be, but that's a complete unknown, and it *won't* be made known UNTIL Oracle decides to actually ship it the next day. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
I dont have a cluster or specialized hardware at home, to do heavy calculations. I can buy Nvidia card to do calculations, but Solaris does not support OpenCL nor CUDA nor anything similar - as far as I know. To use graphic cards to do heavy calculation I need to switch OS to Linux with OpenCL, which is not an option. A question: If I buy Nvidia graphic card, and install Windows in VirtualBox together with 3D support - could I use OpenCL / CUDA / whatever in the Windows VM? Regarding i7 uses too much power, and i5 is better - i5 doesnt suit my needs. I want plenty of CPU power when I need to and it does not matter if the cpu sucks much power when I am doing heavy calculations. The rest of the time, when I dont do heavy calculations, I want it to idle at very low wattage. I basically want a cpu with low wattage in idle and when I surf the web. When I need to, I want to have plenty of power and in that case it it allowed to suck much wattage. I would not like to have a weak cpu, and when I need to do some heavy work, I need to switch to another PC with a beefy CPU. Then I need two PC, one for web surf etc and one for heavy work. I want one PC, that has low power wattage in idle and surf the web, and plenty of muscles when the need rises. I suspect Sandybridge will idle at 50W. Or maybe I wait for Ivy bridge... Regarding the 3D driver for Sandybridge. Yesterday I got a mail from someone at Oracle writing: "We are planning on integrating 3D support for Sandybridge as soon as we get KMS support in." Thank you for this information! :o) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/25/11 04:23 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: I dont have a cluster or specialized hardware at home, to do heavy calculations. I can buy Nvidia card to do calculations, but Solaris does not support OpenCL nor CUDA nor anything similar - as far as I know. To use graphic cards to do heavy calculation I need to switch OS to Linux with OpenCL, which is not an option. A question: If I buy Nvidia graphic card, and install Windows in VirtualBox together with 3D support - could I use OpenCL / CUDA / whatever in the Windows VM? Not in a Windows guest. Parallels Workstation Extreme supports a GPU dedicated to a guest, but the software alone is expensive. Submit an enhancement request for VirtualBox. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
> Date: Friday, February 25, 2011, 8:04 AM > On 02/25/11 04:23 AM, Orvar Korvar > wrote: > > I dont have a cluster or specialized hardware at home, > to do heavy calculations. I can buy Nvidia card to do > calculations, but Solaris does not support OpenCL nor > CUDA nor anything similar - as far as I know. To use graphic > cards to do heavy calculation I need to switch OS to Linux > with OpenCL, which is not an option. > > > > A question: If I buy Nvidia graphic card, and install > Windows in VirtualBox together with 3D support - could I use > OpenCL / CUDA / whatever in the Windows VM? Ok, we may have gotten off track a bit. CUDA (and the like) are nice for heavy lifting to GPUs. You can do this at home at a decent cost (much lower than I did several years ago). The unofficial CUDA for Solaris port was done 3-4 years ago by John Martin (Oracle). He deserves that credit. No public release on record. Now comparing the 3.4Ghz Sandy Bridge Core i7-2x00K versus a Nvidia GT 430 computability is kinda like getting into driving cars. Different strokes for different folks. Back to your question, as said the Sandy Bridge graphics support is forthcoming but depends on other features/updates to drivers and the libraries. But for basic computability, you can run with a Sandy Bridge motherboard today with OI_148a/Sol-11x and super compute till your heart's content today! NO updates required. ~ Ken Mays ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/25/2011 1:23 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: Regarding i7 uses too much power, and i5 is better - i5 doesnt suit my needs. I want plenty of CPU power when I need to and it does not matter if the cpu sucks much power when I am doing heavy calculations. The rest of the time, when I dont do heavy calculations, I want it to idle at very low wattage. I basically want a cpu with low wattage in idle and when I surf the web. When I need to, I want to have plenty of power and in that case it it allowed to suck much wattage. I would not like to have a weak cpu, and when I need to do some heavy work, I need to switch to another PC with a beefy CPU. Then I need two PC, one for web surf etc and one for heavy work. I want one PC, that has low power wattage in idle and surf the web, and plenty of muscles when the need rises. I suspect Sandybridge will idle at 50W. Or maybe I wait for Ivy bridge... Like I said before, modern CPUs idle down quite far when under low load. The Clarksdale i5, all SandyBridges (i5 & i7), Athlon II X4, and even Phenom II X6, will shut down cores that aren't being used. So, for web surfing, you're likely idling half of the CPU, a 65W TDP CPU should run at 30W or less. That's ALL the current-gen CPUs. i7 single-threaded performance isn't really any better than i5, even on SandyBridge-cores. SandyBridge single-thread is pretty much the same as Clarksdale single-thread, and both are 10-15% faster than Athlon/Phenom single-thread. Exact performance depends on your application, as both the i7 and Phenoms have significant L3 cache which can really help certain apps (and be totally worthless for others). Realistically, an i7 will be faster than an i5 on heavy memory-access applications (they have a faster/wider memory bus). On low-memory access stuff, an i7 won't be noticeably faster than an i5. Also, an i7's HyperThreading can be both a bane and a boon. For certain apps, having more threads available is great; however, you can easily get into cache thrashing with HyperThreading, so it's really best used when you have a single app that wants 80% of the threads, not 10 apps all with one thread each. In the later case, you'd be better off with a Phenom II X6 (or, shutting off Hyperthreading, but then again, why not get an i5 in that case?). (I work in the Java VM group, and see lots of issues around getting the best performance with HyperThreading on - how to maximize your performance without stepping in the "death zones" where it tanks.) Regarding the 3D driver for Sandybridge. Yesterday I got a mail from someone at Oracle writing: "We are planning on integrating 3D support for Sandybridge as soon as we get KMS support in." Thank you for this information! :o) [Obdisclaimer: I do not speak for Oracle, nor have any privileged inside info about this] Also, do be aware that Solaris 11 Express is almost certainly required for this support (whenever it shows up); it's unlikely to be made available to the IllumOS/OpenIndiana folks. So, you'll either (a) have to buy a support contract for your PC to get it ($1000 or so), or (b) wait for the next release of Solaris 11 Express (maybe 6 months or more?) -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 08:56 -0800, Erik Trimble wrote: > On 2/25/2011 1:23 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > > Regarding i7 uses too much power, and i5 is better - i5 doesnt suit my > > needs. I want plenty of CPU power when I need to and it does not matter if > > the cpu sucks much power when I am doing heavy calculations. The rest of > > the time, when I dont do heavy calculations, I want it to idle at very low > > wattage. I basically want a cpu with low wattage in idle and when I surf > > the web. When I need to, I want to have plenty of power and in that case it > > it allowed to suck much wattage. > > > > I would not like to have a weak cpu, and when I need to do some heavy work, > > I need to switch to another PC with a beefy CPU. Then I need two PC, one > > for web surf etc and one for heavy work. I want one PC, that has low power > > wattage in idle and surf the web, and plenty of muscles when the need > > rises. I suspect Sandybridge will idle at 50W. Or maybe I wait for Ivy > > bridge... > > Like I said before, modern CPUs idle down quite far when under low load. > The Clarksdale i5, all SandyBridges (i5 & i7), Athlon II X4, and even > Phenom II X6, will shut down cores that aren't being used. So, for web > surfing, you're likely idling half of the CPU, a 65W TDP CPU should run > at 30W or less. That's ALL the current-gen CPUs. > > i7 single-threaded performance isn't really any better than i5, even on > SandyBridge-cores. SandyBridge single-thread is pretty much the same as > Clarksdale single-thread, and both are 10-15% faster than Athlon/Phenom > single-thread. Exact performance depends on your application, as both > the i7 and Phenoms have significant L3 cache which can really help > certain apps (and be totally worthless for others). > > Realistically, an i7 will be faster than an i5 on heavy memory-access > applications (they have a faster/wider memory bus). On low-memory access > stuff, an i7 won't be noticeably faster than an i5. Also, an i7's > HyperThreading can be both a bane and a boon. For certain apps, having > more threads available is great; however, you can easily get into cache > thrashing with HyperThreading, so it's really best used when you have a > single app that wants 80% of the threads, not 10 apps all with one > thread each. In the later case, you'd be better off with a Phenom II X6 > (or, shutting off Hyperthreading, but then again, why not get an i5 in > that case?). (I work in the Java VM group, and see lots of issues > around getting the best performance with HyperThreading on - how to > maximize your performance without stepping in the "death zones" where it > tanks.) > > I'm going to followup on my post above, with a bit more information, and a admission of incorrectness. My experience with the SandyBridge architecture has been in the Xeon dual- and quad-socket systems we use here, and test against similarly configured Nehalem/Westmere Xeons and AMD Shanghai and MangyCours CPUs. What I'm looking at now is several places which have benchmarked and tested the i5-based SandyBrigde CPUs against i5/i7 Nehalem/Westmere desktop chips, and the Athlon II/Phenom II chips. The results differ from what my (server-oriented) experience has been: to whit, that the SandyBridge architecture provides significant performance boost over the Nehalem microarchitecture on most usages, and is very noticably faster than the Athlon II/Phenom II configuration. So, I take it back: if you do indeed want maximum performance right now, a i5-2000/3000-series SandyBridge chip is the way to go. And they do pull significantly lower power than the Nehalem-based chips (though not less than the Energy Efficient Athlon/Phenoms). The issues around the graphics driver still are salient, however. As, of course, it the question of How Much Compute Power Does One Really Need. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-317 Phone: x67195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
Guys, thanx for all input! Very valuable! There are no CUDA available for Solaris? In no way? And no OpenCL? I will ask Virtualbox forum for OpenCL / CUDA. Would be nice if it where possible. Again, thanx. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
> Here's how Intel does product differentiation: > > If the product is an "iN" something or other (e.g. > i3/i5/i7 or the > like), regardless of the underlying architecture, the > memory controller > DOES NOT support ECC. > > If the product is labeled "Xeon" something or other, > it DOES support ECC. To keep beating a dead horse, it is possible to get ECC in an Intel iN processor. Here, for example, is a PDF from Intel with some details http://download.intel.com/pressroom/kits/embedded/pdfs/Core_i5-660_Corei3-540.pdf The relevant quote is " Error correcting code (ECC) memory is supported on both processors when paired with the Intel 3450 chipset." So what's happening is that Intel wants everyone to think they must have a Xeon to get ECC, but there are at least two Intel iN processors that support it. Of course you need a corresponding motherboard to take advantage of ECC. I'm not sure of the practical value of the above, since, seeing as Sandy Bridge stuff is either here or right around the corner, it would probably make sense to see how Intel's Sandy Bridge ECC strategy settles out. From links previously posted here, it looks like ECC will be much more widely supported on the new iN chips w/o requiring a Xeon branding. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 2/28/2011 2:14 AM, Bohdan Tashchuk wrote: Here's how Intel does product differentiation: If the product is an "iN" something or other (e.g. i3/i5/i7 or the like), regardless of the underlying architecture, the memory controller DOES NOT support ECC. If the product is labeled "Xeon" something or other, it DOES support ECC. To keep beating a dead horse, it is possible to get ECC in an Intel iN processor. Here, for example, is a PDF from Intel with some details http://download.intel.com/pressroom/kits/embedded/pdfs/Core_i5-660_Corei3-540.pdf The relevant quote is " Error correcting code (ECC) memory is supported on both processors when paired with the Intel 3450 chipset." So what's happening is that Intel wants everyone to think they must have a Xeon to get ECC, but there are at least two Intel iN processors that support it. Of course you need a corresponding motherboard to take advantage of ECC. I'm not sure of the practical value of the above, since, seeing as Sandy Bridge stuff is either here or right around the corner, it would probably make sense to see how Intel's Sandy Bridge ECC strategy settles out. From links previously posted here, it looks like ECC will be much more widely supported on the new iN chips w/o requiring a Xeon branding. And, yet, according to ark.intel.com (which, tends to be authoritative on their shipping products), there are *exactly TWO* "desktop" processors that can support ECC. Both are Celerons, neither are iN, both are older, and really, both are embedded-only products. There are several iN processors that support ECC, but they're all the "mobile" version (which Intel also sells to the embedded market). http://ark.intel.com/MySearch.aspx?s=t&ECCMemory=true The "mobile" products are useless for this discussion, since you're not going to find any sort of a motherboard that will take them. That is, until you pay so much for the mobile/embedded motherboard that you should have just gotten a Xeon/standard motherboard. Everything else is a Xeon. And I can't see any reason (or have any indication) for Intel to change its tune. In fact, the exact opposite. Many review sites are commenting on the fact that the SandyBridge chips have several new features (extra Turbo, lower power modes, etc), and Intel is doing product differentiation on these features, too. It seems as though if an Intel chip has M features, Intel will produce a full M! combination of different models. The reviewers were (in my view rightly) complaining that it's now very hard as a consumer to pick the right CPU model, because figuring out which features are in which CPU is completely non-obvious. And, for better or worse, for desktop/server use, ECC goes only with the Xeon brand. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
