An anonymous user writes, "Apple announced it has begun shipping its Xserve G5, the most powerful Xserve yet, to customers. Single processor is $2,999.00, dual processor is $3,999.00."
-- In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
Price Comparison
by
vasqzr
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Apple $3,999
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 512K L2 cache/processor 1GHz system bus/processor 1GB DDR400 ECC SDRAM 80GB Serial ATA drive Mac OS X Server (Unlimited Client) Dual Gigabit Ethernet CD ROM drive
Dell $4,127
PE1750 1U Dual 2.4GHz Xeon 72GB HD 1GB RAM Dual Gigabit Ethernet CDROM NO OS
$5,626 if you get the dual 3.2 GHz chips (1MB Cache, 2MB is more) that Apple compares the XServe to on their website.
Re:Price Comparison
by
RalphBNumbers
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Actually that price you quote for the Sun doesn't include the operation system.
It's also worth noting that the Opteron 242 is the 1.6Ghz version.
Sun doesn't sell the Opteron 246 (the 2ghz chips that apple compares it's XServe to on it's site), but either the 244 (1.8Ghz) or 248 (2.2Ghz) would probably make a more fair comparison.
The base prices for Sun's dual 244 and 248 1U servers are $4,445.00 and $6,995.00 respectively.
-- "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
Re:Price Comparison
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Informative
There are alot of reasons that HP model is cheaper.
Unlike the XServe, the Dell, and the Sun, that HP's drives are not hot swapable. (and I'd be willing to bet alot of other internals aren't either)
It has the least cache of the x86 offereings.
It has the by far the slowest memory of any of the servers in the thread (it has DDR266, where most have DDR333, and the XServe has DDR400).
It has only one PCIX slot, where most of the offerings in the thread have 2 or more.
etc...
You get what you pay for.
Price per gigaflop
by
Somegeek
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I looked at the results and figured, ok the Apple is faster, but the Opteron will be cheaper and faster on a per dollar basis. That's not what I found:
G5 server as configured for Apple's linpac test: dual g5, 1gb ram, dual 250gb sata $4799.00 at apple.com achieved 9 gigaflops in Apple's test $533/gigaflop (its worth noting that in Apple's tech paper (link below), they quote $333/gigaflop, but that in a footnote, #5, they base that on a MSRP of 2799 and 9 gigaflop performance. Now where they are getting that price from I don't know, and the math doesn't work out either, so I'm going with my numbers.)
IBM e325 server as configured by Apple for linpac test: dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual scsi 15k 36gb (user installed linux os) $5191.00 at ibm.com achieved 5.9 in Apple's test $878/gigaflop
generic server with similar config as Apple used for IBM server for linpac test: dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual sata 7200 80gb preinstalled linux os $3126.00 at asaservers.com assuming 5.9 in Apple's test $529/gigaflop. (sure you could probably build something cheaper yourself, but this comes with a warranty and support.)
So, for this benchmark, Apple looks like the best performer, and at a good price/performance standpoint too. And to get similar performance, you would need more Opteron blades, which means more space, heat, juice, etc.
Yes, this still leaves a lot up in the air; it would be nice to see these tests run by an independent party, etc, using an AMD hardware configuration that was optimized for the test as the Apple surely was, etc. etc.
Apple's notes on test configurations and performance results for the xserve G5: http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0f 03b/w ww.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf
-- And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
I can think of a few...
by
Llywelyn
·
· Score: 4, Informative
0) It is a 1U Rackmount. Significantly smaller. 1) *Dual* onboard gigabit ethernet on an independent bus. 2) 3 SATA drive channels w/ *hardware* RAID 0, 1, 3, and 5. This is opposed to the Tower's support for Software RAID 0 and 1. 3) ECC RAM. 4) Lower heat and possibly power. This is (strictly) a guess based on them using a newer revision of the processor. 5) A DB-9 serial port. 6) Blinkenlights:-) 7) Yes, OS X Server.
Slashdot Mirror
Also available is a $2,999 DUal 2 GHz cluster node, which can run Xgrid, so you too can feel like Virginia Tech.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
Apple
$3,999
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
512K L2 cache/processor
1GHz system bus/processor
1GB DDR400 ECC SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA drive
Mac OS X Server (Unlimited Client)
Dual Gigabit Ethernet
CD ROM drive
Dell
$4,127
PE1750 1U
Dual 2.4GHz Xeon
72GB HD
1GB RAM
Dual Gigabit Ethernet
CDROM
NO OS
$5,626 if you get the dual 3.2 GHz chips (1MB Cache, 2MB is more) that Apple compares the XServe to on their website.
I looked at the results and figured, ok the Apple is faster, but the Opteron will be cheaper and faster on a per dollar basis. That's not what I found:
f 03b/w ww.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf
G5 server as configured for Apple's linpac test:
dual g5, 1gb ram, dual 250gb sata
$4799.00 at apple.com
achieved 9 gigaflops in Apple's test
$533/gigaflop
(its worth noting that in Apple's tech paper (link below), they quote $333/gigaflop, but that in a footnote, #5, they base that on a MSRP of 2799 and 9 gigaflop performance. Now where they are getting that price from I don't know, and the math doesn't work out either, so I'm going with my numbers.)
IBM e325 server as configured by Apple for linpac test:
dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual scsi 15k 36gb
(user installed linux os)
$5191.00 at ibm.com
achieved 5.9 in Apple's test
$878/gigaflop
generic server with similar config as Apple used for IBM server for linpac test:
dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual sata 7200 80gb
preinstalled linux os
$3126.00 at asaservers.com
assuming 5.9 in Apple's test
$529/gigaflop.
(sure you could probably build something cheaper yourself, but this comes with a warranty and support.)
So, for this benchmark, Apple looks like the best performer, and at a good price/performance standpoint too. And to get similar performance, you would need more Opteron blades, which means more space, heat, juice, etc.
Yes, this still leaves a lot up in the air; it would be nice to see these tests run by an independent party, etc, using an AMD hardware configuration that was optimized for the test as the Apple surely was, etc. etc.
Apple's notes on test configurations and performance results for the xserve G5:
http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
0) It is a 1U Rackmount. Significantly smaller. :-)
1) *Dual* onboard gigabit ethernet on an independent bus.
2) 3 SATA drive channels w/ *hardware* RAID 0, 1, 3, and 5. This is opposed to the Tower's support for Software RAID 0 and 1.
3) ECC RAM.
4) Lower heat and possibly power. This is (strictly) a guess based on them using a newer revision of the processor.
5) A DB-9 serial port.
6) Blinkenlights
7) Yes, OS X Server.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX