Feeds

HP injects blade PCs with fresh Athlons

The un-PC dream lives

Build a business case: developing custom apps

HP has delivered a much needed refresh to its blade PC product line, upgrading the hardware and graphics performance of the systems.

HP released its last batch of Consolidated Client Infrastructure (CCI) gear way back in Nov. of 2005. The big transition taking place then was a shift from Transmeta-based systems to Athlon-based systems.

With its new BladeSystem bc2000 and bc2500 blade PCs, HP has stuck with the Athlon chips. The former ships with a single-core Athlon 64 2100+ chip, 80GB of SATA disk and 1GB of memory for $1,000 (if you agree to buy 10 systems). The bc2500 ships with a dual-core Athlon 64 X2 3000+ chip, 80GB of SATA disk and 1GB of memory for $1,500 - again in relative volume.

The systems account for half of HP's take on untraditional PCs. The company also sells a wide range of thin clients.

One of the main grumbles surrounding such products has been their inability to mimic the performance - nay, user experience - of a regular desktop. With that in mind, HP will ship its very own Remote Graphics software as part of PC Session Allocation Manager 2.0.

HP has included the Remote Graphics software with its blade workstations in the past. The software is based on a codec crafted by HP and Nasa that helps heavier workloads such as graphics streaming make their way from a blade PC out to a client terminal. HP sees the protocol as a complement to the popular remote desktop protocol (RDP), which also ships on HP's blade PCs.

While HP's core blade server line relies on the 10U c-Class chassis, the blade PCs come with their own 3U chassis, which can hold up to 20 blades.

If you're not convinced by the blade PC concept, we won't hold it against you. Numerous vendors have been banging on about thin clients and blade PCs for years.

The likes of Wyse, Citrix, HP, ClearCube, Sun Microsystems and IBM tell us that the technology will really take off now because of improvements in processing power and bandwidth. So there you have it. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
Tip: Put the shades on and you'll look less of a spanner
So, Apple won't sell cheap kit? Prepare the iOS garden wall WRECKING BALL
It can throw the low cost race if it looks to the cloud
One step closer to ROBOT BUTLERS: Dyson flashes vid of VACUUM SUCKER bot
Latest cleaner available for world+dog in September
Samsung Gear S: Quick, LAUNCH IT – before Apple straps on iWatch
Full specs for wrist-mounted device here ... but who'll buy it?
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Now that's FIRE WIRE: HP recalls 6 MILLION burn-risk laptop cables
Right in the middle of Burning Mains Man week
Apple's iWatch? They cannae do it ... they don't have the POWER
Analyst predicts fanbois will have to wait until next year
HUGE iPAD? Maybe. HUGE ADVERTS? That's for SURE
Noo! Hand not big enough! Don't look at meee!
AMD unveils 'single purpose' graphics card for PC gamers and NO ONE else
Chip maker claims the Radeon R9 285 is 'best in its class'
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.