The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Intel (finally) uncages Nehalem-EX beast

Like Itanium. But you might actually use it

Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Backup/Recovery

Intel's switch to the Nehalem architecture was finally completed Tuesday with the launch of the Nehalem-EX Xeon 6500 and 7500 processors, the last of the Core, Xeon, and Itanium chips to get the Quick Path Interconnect and a slew of features that make Intel chips compete head-to-head with alternatives from Advanced Micro Devices. The price war at the midrange and high-end of the x64 market can now get underway, while the all-out, total price war awaits the debut of AMD's Opteron 6100 processors in the second quarter.

Since the summer of 2008. Intel has been previewing its top-end, eight-core Nehalem-EX beast, which we now know as the Xeon X7560. As it has done with prior generations of Xeons, the Nehalem-EX line is not comprised of one or two chips, but a mix of chips with different features (clock speed, cache memory, HyperThreading, and Turbo Boost) dialed up and down to give customers chips tuned for specific workloads.

While last year's Nehalem-EP Xeon 5500 and this year's Westmere-EP Xeon 5600 processors are aimed at workstations or servers with two sockets, with the Nehalem-EX lineup, Intel has broadened the definition of its Expandable Server (this is apparently what EX is short for, with EP is supposed to be an abbreviation for Efficient Performance) to include two-socket machines as well as the four-socket and larger machines that prior generations of Xeon MP processors were designed for.

Intel, no doubt, would have preferred to keep the Xeon DP and Xeon MP product lines more distinct, and charged a hefty premium for machines that needed expanded processor sockets or memory capability. But server makers and their customers were having none of that. With the rapid adoption of server virtualization and the need for larger memory footprints even for two-socket boxes, the Nehalem-EX processors have been tweaked so they can be used to support very fat memory configurations on even two-socket workhorse servers. This will eat into the volume Xeon 5500 and 5600 market, to be sure, but it is better to sell a Xeon 6500 or 7500 server in a two-socket box than have a customer dump Intel for AMD.

The Xeon 6500 and 7500 processors will also blur some lines between Xeon processors and the former "flagship" Itanium processors, which were supposed to take over the desktop and server arena starting a decade ago, but have been relegated mostly to high-end servers from HP running HP-UX, NonStop, and OpenVMS at this point in their history. The Itaniums were distinct in many ways from the Xeons, but the main distinction they held was better reliability, availability, and serviceability (RAS) features than Xeons had, and on par with mainframe, RISC, and other proprietary architectures from days done by.

Intel Nehalem-EX Die Shot

The eight-core Nehalem-EX Xeon 7500 beast

But at the launch event today in San Francisco, Kirk Skaugen, vice president of the Intel Architecture Group and general manager of its Data Center Group, made no bones about the fact that the Nehalem-EX processors and their related Boxboro chipset that is shared with the Itanium 9300 processors launched in early February have common RAS features.

The new chip, explained Skaugen, has 20 new RAS features, including extended page tables and virtual I/O capabilities as well as a function that is in mainframes, RISC iron, and Itaniums called machine check architecture recovery, which allows a server to have a double-bit error in main memory and cope with it without halting the system. With Windows, Solaris, and Linux supporting these RAS features, as well as VMware's ESX Server hypervisor, this makes servers based on the Xeon 7500s just as suitable a replacement for proprietary midrange and mainframe platforms and RISC/Unix servers as the formerly beloved Itaniums.

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

Anonymous Coward

Ah, the mainframe guy still trying to justify his existence!

It is the same as the TCP/IP principle - you know that the IP layer will have errors, so you compensate for them in the TCP layer. You know a 'pc' will not be resilient, so you cluster/grid/RAC/virtual farm 2 or more of them to compensate.

So you get the similar performance for an order of magnitude reduction in cost.

1
0

sigh again again

Again your post is again full of various strange statements so it is kind of hard to know where to begin.

First on the spec_int part.

Well I'd rather wait with the SPEC_INT comparisons, Intel is reporting base numbers only. Which makes it kind of an invalid comparison, cause the specint numbers for Nehalem-EX could be significant better. So we'll just wait and see those ones.

As for

http://www.intel.com/performance/server/xeon_mp/summary.htm?iid=perf_server+mp_sum

Now what caught my eye is these benchmarks:

SPEC_JBB2005

Fujitsu PRIMEQUEST* 1800E 64 cores 8 sockets -> 3,321,826 BOBS/

IBM System x* 3850 X5 32 cores 4 sockets -> 2,012,730 BOBS.

This you have to compare to

IBM Power 750 Express 32 cores 4 sockets -> 2,478,929 BOBS

Which would mean that a 3.0 GHz power 750 would be faster, than the x3850. Now as for price then a half filled x3850 costs half that of a half filled power 750.

And SAP 2 Tier.

Fujitsu PRIMEQUEST* 1800E 64 cores 8 sockets -> 16.000 users.

IBM System x* 3850 X5 32 cores 4 sockets -> 10.450 users

This you have to compare to

IBM Power 750 Express 32 cores 4 sockets -> 15.600 users

So to match POWER7 you need a big boy 12U PrimeQuest 1800E, Now I don't have the price of that box, but other PrimeQuest boxes I have seen are in the same price range as a power 780.

But AC's comments on RAS features on Nehalem EX are relevant. These are the same reasons why people buy SD/MX000 and POWER 7XX boxes.

Again you get what you pay for.

Just admit it, lowest clocked POWER7 is as fast as the highest clocked Nehalem-EX and when the number of sockets grow.. then POWER7 is a sure winner.

And I don't know where you get your 256 socket x86 Solaris boxes from.. Well.. Sure SGI makes some but it's not like they support Solaris on that machine. Sure compile it yourself.. if Oracle hasn't cut support for something you need. As they are doing on other platforms right now.

And MC based boxes.. lets see some numbers rather than your mad ramblings.

// Jesper

1
0

tough choice

$3,157 for an 8-core 1.86Ghz 95W chip from Intel for 4 socket systems

$1,165 for a 12-core 2.2Ghz 80W chip from AMD for 4 socket systems

tough choice...

2
1

More from The Register

SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
You don't need phone lines or cable for ANYTHING, says Dish
The satellite-dish man can sort you out with phone and broadband over the air too
 breaking news
What's HP got under wraps? Looks awfully flash and tape shaped
What happens in Vegas won't stay there - we've got the details
AMD lifts the veil on Opteron, ARM chip plans for 2014
Not much action going on in 2013, though
Microsoft borks botnet takedown in Citadel snafu
Stupid Redmond kicked over our honeypots, wail white hats
IBM's $1bn layoffs latest: Now axe swings in US, Canada - reports
Union claims 121 storage bods canned after dismal sales
NetApp musters muscular cluster bluster for ONTAP busters
Storage array OS overhauled to juggle more nodes, go down on you, er, less
HP adds 'Haswell' Xeon E3s to entry ProLiant servers
Gussies up MicroServer for SMBs, adds baby switches