[CentOS] Intel Atom systems?

Sat May 23 19:05:29 UTC 2009
Per Qvindesland <per at norhex.com>

Hi

Sure not a problem, i am never really consider power any much in a
rack since there a other stuff in my racks that sucks a lot more power
then a p4 dual machine :) 

Per

E-mail: per at norhex.com [1]
http://www.linkedin.com/in/perqvindesland [2]
--- Original message follows ---
SUBJECT: Re: [CentOS] Intel Atom systems?
FROM:  Peter Arremann 
TO: "CentOS mailing list" 
DATE: 23-05-2009 20:55

On Saturday 23 May 2009 02:15:54 pm Per Qvindesland wrote:
> I am not so sure that I would go for something with an Atom
processor
> installed if it is going to be on 24/7 then I would rather if price
> has to be low, look at building a machine with a p4 dual core, they
> are really cheap and don't mind being on 24/7 after all Atom has
half
> the processing speed as a pentium m processor.
>

> Per

Per, sorry to be so direct - but in my opinion that's a horrible 
recommendation because within a few months, you spent more on power
than the 
system costs... Even with speedstep properly configured, you're going
to burn a 
lot more power on any P4.Doing the same basic file and print
services, the Atom 
boxes we built used around 35W average vs 140W on the P4 dual cores
that they 
replaced. Only had one failure so far but we think that was user
error - 
something seems to have blocked the fan because all other systems had
lots of 
dust in it and the failed unit was perfectly clean.... 

Overall, the Atom boxes worked great for us. We didn't have a
specific reason 
not to choose VIA, atom boards were just easier to find, at least
when we were 
doing this. Can't help you with a specific model board though since
we only 
needed a single lan port...

Peter.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS at centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Links:
------
[1] http://webmail.norhex.com/#
[2] http://www.linkedin.com/in/perqvindesland
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090523/82ff698e/attachment-0005.html>