Re: [Xen-users] HTPC + DUAL PC In one

[Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@xxxxxxxxx>]

I hadn't thought about this before now, but part of my results may be
because my desktop is running Gentoo with very aggressive optimizations
for the specific processor, whereas the Intel server is running Fedora
20, which just uses -O2 -mtune=generic for optimizations.  Another
factor might be that most of my workloads, and therefore most of the
benchmarking that I do, are memory-bound, and even though both systems
use DDR3-1600 memory, the server is a NUMA system and has the memory
split between the two processors.

Just comparing processors of similar price from AMD and Intel, you will
almost always get a better processor from AMD.  It may not always have
the most up-to date set of ISA extensions, but that hardly matters when
running Windows because Windows won't try to take advantage of anything
that came out after that version of Windows (which is why XP's
performance sucks compared to Win7 on newer systems).
On 07/16/2014 06:12 AM, Mattia Carrara wrote:
> Hello again Guys. I looked up that HP Microserver, it is pretty cool and
> cheap. Now I have a limited budged so i will remain on virtualized HTPC.
> Maybe in the future it will be useful. 
> 
> Kristian thank you for the infos on CPU and Motherboard, i wasn't able
> to find them.
> 
> Ragarding unRaid, i read something about it. Is it a good idea to
> install it as Dom0? In such way it will manage the storage of all the
> VMs. Gordan what is a ZFS reciever?
> 
> About CPUs, I find on the net some benchmarks:
> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=1780&cmp[]=1782&cmp[]=2275
> It seems that i7 is more performant than AMDs... But the point is that
> using Xen and multiple virtual machines, i'll need more parallel
> calculus power, right? So 8 cores would be better? Is it possible that
> those benchmarks aren't done using all the eight cores of AMDs? Austin
> said that he can reach the calculus power of a dual processor Xeon
> E3-1286 v3. That's really a good result. So maybe i should choose AMD...
> 
> Another point is that one virtual machine will be for myself, the other
> one for my family. My family doesn't need much caclculus power, but in
> my VM i need the top calculus power i can get with my budget (500â, for
> CPU and motherboard, maybe something more in the future). What do you
> suggest? 
> 
> 
> 2014-07-16 10:19 GMT+02:00 Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gordan@xxxxxxxxxx>>:
> 
>     I haven't tried any encryption, but I do use them heavily with ZFS,
>     mostly 4-disk RAIDZ2. Receive always saturates the gigabit ethernet
>     link and scrubs go at about 250MB/s. All my models are older N36L
>     (1.3GHz) and N40L (1.5GHz), i.e. substantially less CPU than the
>     most recent N54L (2.2GHz).
> 
> 
>     Kuba <kuba.0000@xxxxx <mailto:kuba.0000@xxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     >That HP's Microserver looks very interesting, seems ideal for a zfs
>     >receive server. Did you happen to benchmark it? I would be very
>     grateful
>     >for any numbers (even very rough), especially related to how does it
>     >handle zfs receive and encryption.
>     >
>     >Kuba
>     >
>     >W dniu 2014-07-16 08:23, Gordan Bobic pisze:
>     >> This is actually a good point. My HTPC is a standalone HP G7
>     >> Microserver. Â110 new, complete with RAM and a disk. I have a
>     HD6450 in
>     >> mine purely because that adds a better GPU than what is built in, and
>     >> provides HDMI output with audio. But it still means you get a
>     complete
>     >> machine for Â150, that will also double as a pretty decent storage
>     >> server if you fill it up with disks (if you need that sort of thing).
>     >>
>     >> On 07/16/2014 01:35 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>     >>> I've got an FX-8320 in my desktop over-clocked to 4.0 GHz, 8
>     'cores', 1
>     >>> thread per-core, 125W TDP, and on every benchmark I have tested
>     it with,
>     >>> it out-preforms a dual processor Xeon E3-1286 v3 (3.7GHz, 4 cores, 2
>     >>> threads per core, 88W TDP) server I work with at my job, even when I
>     >>> force the AMD processor down to 1.4GHz.  The Intel server cost
>     more than
>     >>> 4x as much as the desktop system, takes up more than 3x as much
>     space
>     >>> (based on volume), uses more than 2.5x as much power, and still
>     can't
>     >>> beat the AMD desktop system.
>     >>>
>     >>> Just as an Aside, using virtualization for a HTPC system is
>     probably not
>     >>> the best option.  I would personally suggest looking into a
>     board based
>     >>> on the AMD E1-2100 (1.0GHz, 2 cores, integrated Radeon HD 8210 GPU),
>     >>> it's more than sufficient for an HTPC or lightweight (non-gaming)
>     >>> desktop, can be passively cooled, and you can get Mini-ITX
>     boards based
>     >>> on it (including CPU and GPU).
>     >>> On 07/15/2014 05:20 PM, jacek burghardt wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     >_______________________________________________
>     >Xen-users mailing list
>     >Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>     _______________________________________________
>     Xen-users mailing list
>     Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
> 
>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users