Home > Intel Communities > Open Port IT Community > The Server Room > Blog > Tags > power
1 2 3 4 5 Previous Next

The Server Room Blog

69 Posts tagged with the power tag
0

I'll be up front, I really don't know what Brittany Spears, Miley Cyrus or Susan Boyle would say about moving from RISC to the Xeon 5500 processor!. What I can share is the feedback that I'm getting direct from customers. I'm currently out on the road and have got some real feedback direct from customers on why they are looking at migrating their solutions from RISC  processors to Xeon processors.

 

Over the past couple of days I have had the opportunity to meet directly with individual customers and hosted a roundtable with several customers to discuss their plans to replace their RISC based infrastructure. The conversation has been very open and frank and has not been about 'should I move' but more focused on 'how do I make the move'. As could be expected the down economy is placing big taxes on the ability of IT organizations to support their business units need for organic growth in a flat to down IT spending environment. A big priority for most of the customers that I spoke with is how to reduce their overall TCO while still meeting the increased demands being placed on IT by their business Partners. Most of the customers are already engaged in active projects to assess moving from RISC or are building their plans to make this migration.

 

During the roundtable I had opportunity to share the latest Xeon 5500 processor performance comparisons Vs the main SPARC and POWER based solutions out there. There was great rejoicing and joy (ok I'm taking poetic license here) in the roundtable when we share some of the results that we highlighted when we launched the Xeon 5500 processor just over 3 weeks ago. So I want to spread the joy and let you read for yourself the performance and price performance benefits.

 

We compared the Xeon 5570 processor vs the top UltraSPARCT2+ in a 2 socket configuration. We took best published results on spec.org and sap (so no funny games at play). The results comparing best UltraSPARCT2+ vs best Xeon 5500 with 1 taken as baseline for SPARC redults were amazing

- 20% better on SAP-SD

- 62% better java performance for Specjbb2005

- 69%better for integer performance SPECIntrate-2006

- 75% better for floating point performance SPECfprate-2006

But the best bit was the cost competitiveness of the Xeon 5500 solutions. Comparing both solutions with 32GB memory, the Xeon 5500 based solutions are offered at approx $11,000 whereas the UltraSPARCT2+ is at $36,000.

 

Compared the Xeon 5570 processor vs the top POWER6 in a 2 socket configuration gave even more staggering results. At the roundtable today customers were amazed. They keep hearing that POWER 6 has leading performance and more GHz so better performance. Right?. Wrong is the answer and I noticed many customers scribbling down the comparisons. Again taking 1 as baseline for POWER results

- 150% better on SAP-SD

- 190% better java performance for Specjbb2005

- 126%better for integer performance SPECIntrate-2006

- 90%better for floating point performance SPECfprate-2006

But the best bit was the cost competitiveness of the Xeon 5500 solutions. Comparing both solutions with 32GB memory, the Xeon 5500 based solutions are 92% less expensive than equivalent POWER 6 offerings.

 

I only shared the specific comparisons vs RISC and have not gone into the architectural advancements of the Xeon 5500 processor and how it addresses real business needs that have been flagged to us. There have been lots of other blogs out in cyberspace over the last few weeks on improvements in IO, low latency etc. so you don't need my 2 cents.

 

I think now is the time to make the move from RISC, what do you think?

0 Comments Permalink
4

I've been in Las Vegas this week for the Blades Systems Insight event talking about data center transformation and data center efficiency (no white tiger sightings...just technology this week in Vegas).  This event draws attendees who are deploying high density compute platforms in their data centers and dealing with the power and cooling challenges that come along with these environments. So I was excited to share some of Intel's thoughts on power and cooling optimization beyond pure system refresh.  If you read the blogs on the server room you know plenty about the compelling financial benefits associated with refresh...and if you haven't seen this yet check out my friend Chris Peters' blog here.

 

But back to the show and the shower curtains...If you dip a bit deeper into the challenge of data center efficiency, three primary focus areas emerge:

 

Power: The underlying power cabling and infrastructure into your datacenter.  Ultimately you want the most efficient power delivery possible.

 

Cooling: The HVAC systems, fans, and ducting installed to remove heat from your datacenter and let you avoid thermal environments that make Las Vegas feel chilly.

 

Compute: Server, network and storage gear that drive business producitivity for your organization.  This is why you have datacenters to begin with so the ultimate goal is to optimize percentage of power flowing to compute and productivity spent on every kw of power within your compute infrastructure.

 

At the Blades event we were discussing the impact of high density environments to this fragile ecosystem.  High density environments a) require more power, more than the typical 750W per square foot that an average rack requires and far more than the 75-100W/sq foor that a typical datacenter facility supports.  High density environments also produce a lot of heat that needs to be dealt with by cooling systems that are often close to their cooling capacity.  So how much density is a good thing for datacenters and how do we deal with that gap between power delivered and power required?  I'd like to provide a few concepts but ultimately every datacenter is different...so I'd love to hear from you on how you've dealt with this as well. In this blog I'm going to start with cooling capacity as there are a lot of options to consider:

 

#1 Warmer datacenters.  ASHRAE recently updated their datacenter temp and humidity recommendations with a range of 18-27 C.  What this means is that server inlet temps can be set higher than what many datacenters are running today...the first step here is to measure your server inlet temp to get a picture of what your facility is operating at, checking with your manufacturers warranty spec, and measuring your power usage difference when altering the datacenter temp - remember to take before and after readings on your cooling power usage.

 

#2 Cool aisle containment: This is a pretty simple concept - placing barriers to control cool air and confining it to the area where servers need it.  Think about this as constructing a type of wall or ceiling around the cool aisle to control air flow.  So what are these walls made of? I've seen them made of plexiglass and plastic sheeting...and this week at the conference I heard about one of the largest banks in America who is experimenting with the deployment of shower curtains to control air flow and reporting a 15 degree drop in temperature associated with installation.  Now...last time I checked a shower curtain cost a few bucks so we're not talking about a major investment to test this in your datacenter.

 

#3 Ambient air cooling: Even in Las Vegas datacenters are utilizing outside/filtered ambient air economizers instead of their chillers to deliver cooled air at least part of the year.  This concept is simple - it's like turning on your furnace's fan setting to cool your house instead of your AC and in many regions of the country you can utilize this much of the year at a fraction of the cost of running a chiller.

 

#4 Liquid cooled cabinets - think of these essentially as a good Sub-Zero for the datacenter and especially applicable for the high density environments that we were focused on at the blade conference.  They basically contain a rack of compute equipment and chill this equipment utilizing liquid cooling.  This is a great way to isolate highly dense racks from your datacenter cooling equation completely and works especially well in heterogeneous environments where cooling requirements vary from rack to rack.

 

I will be back to you on the power and compute vectors next...in the meantime I'd love to hear if your datacenter has implemented any of these approaches and any results you've been able to measure.

4 Comments Permalink
6

OK, so we launched the Xeon 5500 processor based servers and workstations a couple of weeks ago. While I don’t have direct quotes of support from Brit, Miley, Susan or any country presidents who have signed economic stimulus into law I am pretty confident that if they were ever actually considering purchasing a server or workstation they would come to the conclusion that the new Xeon 5500 platforms would be their best choice.

I had the privilege of being at one of the thirty seven different worldwide Xeon 5500 launch events. I was on Wall Street and attended the NASDAQ launch event on March 31st. Based on which data source estimate you look at Financial Services as a whole represents about 20% of the worldwide market for servers. It was also evident when meeting with customers in the NYC area that they are passionate about performance and power consumption. Most of them had received pre-production seed systems and had already done extensive testing prior to this launch event. I have been in Intel’s Server Platform Group for over a decade now and I have never seen so much enthusiasm for a product launch.

I won’t rehash the performance benchmarks and performance per watt data. There are many benchmarks, blogs and press articles doing that. What I took away from the conversations was a feeling of optimism from the end users I spoke to. Some people felt that these new products would be what it takes for them to deliver solutions that would give them a performance advantage over their competition. In few markets does that pay off more, and translate almost directly to the bottom line, than in Financial Services. Others felt that these systems would help them continue to add to their existing datacenters without having the need to build a new one. This was due to the performance per watt improvements and the end users ability to replace many old servers and workstations with a few new ones.

Lastly, I think human nature being what it is we are seeing that IT professionals want to work on cool new projects. These Xeon 5500 servers and workstations represent a shiny new toy that IT professionals can use to have a material impact on the bottom lines of their companies. To some degree the same applies to virtualization in that it is disruptive and provides a new cost effective way to deliver legacy solutions and also enables flexibility for future growth. The IT folks that I have met who familiarize themselves with virtualization, new hardware and advanced management techniques (power, systems, virtualization) generally are viewed internal to their companies as leaders with visionary capabilities.

As we all work through this economic morass I am hopeful that with new technology introductions, and a relentless focus on efficiency, we will all emerge with a greater level of capability and a higher degree of flexibility. I also believe IT will emerge as a key asset of differentiation for companies from Wall Street to Main Street and this will place an even greater burden on delivering solutions to meet those unique needs.

What do you think?

Shannon

shannon.poulin@intel.com

6 Comments Permalink
2

Sometimes the next step up is a big one. The Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series (formerly codenamed “Nehalem”) is one of those kinds of steps.

Over the last few years 10 Gigabit has started to take off, but there have always been some negative mutterings: “Why do I need 10 Gigabit?”, “Why do we need this much bandwidth?” or “My server can’t support 10 Gigabit per second bidirectional traffic anyway.” Despite the volume of 10 Gigabit products shipped, there is still the reality that if you intend to use the entire 20 Gbps (10G both directions) or heaven forbid you try to use 40 Gbps with a dual port product; you will likely be sorely disappointed with the results.

 

The reason for this is simple. Most current mainstream servers and 10 Gigabit products don’t support the intense usage models needed to drive that much network I/O and they also don’t have the memory architecture to unleash the full potential of dual 10 Gigabit links.

 

Luckily, that all just changed with Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series.

 

In addition to the great processing improvements that the Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series brings to the table, Intel has also introduced our third generation 10 Gigabit product, the Intel® 82599 10 Gigabit Ethernet Controller which provides two ports, and new capabilities and enhancement to the 10 Gigabit product landscape that help unshackle the new processor from its predecessor’s network I/O handcuffs and unleashes blazing performance in a variety of usage models. These improvements, coupled with the new architecture of the Xeon 5500 provide a symbiotic processor-networking combination that makes new usages possible and expands server and datacenter computing by a big leap… not just a baby step.

 

One of the key changes with Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series architecture is a step function improvement in the internal system I/O. The new local memory controller design, faster cache architecture, and support for DDR3 help push Xeon 5500 to be able to support peak memory bandwidth of ~32 Gigabytes, per socket. In a dual socket system this provides for ~64 Gigabytes of bandwidth which is dramatically more than the previous generation server configuration. In addition, the new Intel® QuickPath Interconnect (Intel® QPI) improves the speed both for inter-Processor communication as well as a faster path to the I/O hub. Finally, PCI Express* 2.0 I/O Bus support has been added to improve the entire data path from Processor to the 10 Gigabit Ethernet link.

 

Taken together, the above improvements are a performance game changer for 10 Gigabit Ethernet.

 

The chart below** shows the previous generation Intel® Xeon® paired with the previous generation Intel 10 Gigabit Ethernet Controller compared to the latest platform using the newest Intel silicon for both processor and networking. Not only is the performance better in 1-4 port configurations, but the performance scales dramatically better to above 50 Gigabits per second of total LAN throughput in a four port configuration vs. *just* 17 Gigabits on the previous generation! A complete platform architecture solution makes this huge improvement possible.

82599 + Xeon 5500.jpg

Now, it’s great that Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series coupled with the Intel® 82599 10 Gigabit Ethernet can deliver such raw performance, but there is the forever nagging question of usage model. Luckily, the new headroom breathes new life into both Virtualization and storage over Ethernet usages (both of which I’ve talked about here and here) and provides new opportunities to more efficiently utilize your network link.

 

Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series allows the vision of consolidation in the datacenter to scale new heights, increasing the number of Virtual Machines (VM) that can effectively live inside a single system enclosure. Each incremental VM will add additional network I/O that is already starting to exhaust a 4 or 8 port single gigabit interface configuration with today’s server capabilities. As more VMs are added in the Xeon 5500 generation, 10 Gigabit will no longer be seen as optional; it will be required. For its part, the Intel® 82599 10 Gigabit Ethernet Controller supports Intel® Virtualization Technology for Connectivity (Intel® VT-c) to improve overall system performance in virtualized server environments. Intel VT- c includes hardware optimizations that help reduce I/O bottlenecks, boost throughput and reduce latency. Components of Intel VT-c include VMDq, and VMDc. VMDc consists of SR-IOV which I’ve covered before, and the ability to support VM mobility; a critical usage model for modern a IT deployment. All together, server systems can support more VMs, more throughput, more flexibility and better performance in a datacenter environment.

 

Finally, the additional capabilities of the Intel® 82599 10 Gigabit Ethernet Controller product surrounding support for FCoE offloads and full support for the new Data Center Bridging (DCB) standards provide an opportunity for storage convergence over Ethernet in either a datacenter using a Fiber Channel SAN environment or an IT environment more focused on iSCSI. On the performance side of things, iSCSI acceleration along with FCoE data path offloads are supported in the Ethernet controller, and on the processor there is support for the CRC instruction set which insures iSCSI data integrity while minimizing processor overhead.

 

The ability to converge at least part of the additional storage infrastructure onto Ethernet is just another factor driving massively increased data rates over Ethernet… luckily, the Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series and the Intel® 82599 10 Gigabit Ethernet Controller solutions are up to the task.

Over the past few days, there has been a lot of noise around Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series and the many other platform components that help it shine its brightest. Improved processing power, memory controller bandwidth, faster and redesigned FSB, and improved 10 Gigabit networking all converge together to provide a fantastic performance, convergence, scalability and power story. Intel’s strong history in the server and processor markets, coupled with over 25 years in Ethernet makes this latest release a natural evolution of technology. Together these capabilities, along with the improved 10 Gigabit features and performance, are helping to transform the datacenter. It will be denser, more power efficient, more performant, and more consolidated with capabilities like FCoE and iSCSI.

 

As for “Why do I need 10 Gigabit?” We have the answer, and it’s the new Xeon®.

 

Ben Hacker

-----

** Source. Intel. Mar 2009. Up to 2.5x performance compared to Intel® Xeon® processor 5300 series. Performance result of a bandwidth intensive network benchmark (IxChariot). Network throughput was measured on 64KB I/O size transfers between the test system and multiple network targets. Intel pre-production system with two Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® processor 5500 series CPUs (2.93 GHz), 12 GB memory (6 x2GB DDR3 - 1066MHz) vs. Intel Production system with two Intel® Xeon® processors X5365 (3.0GHz, 1333MHz FSB), 8 GB memory (8 x 1 GB DDR 2 - 667). Windows Server 2008, stock unmodified installation.

2 Comments Permalink
3

Yesterday – Intel officially launched the Intel® Xeon® 5500 processor (formerly codenamed “Nehalem”) for servers and workstations. One of the most exciting uses of this new platform will be as a key building block in cloud computing infrastructure. Whether you’ve bought into the hype of cloud computing or are a jaded IT realist – you can’t afford to pass up this list of 10 reasons the Intel Xeon 5500 processor is perfect for the cloud.

 

  1. Efficiency. To get the greatest efficiency – the leaders of large-scale Internet providers place their datacenters next to hydroelectric power or other low-cost energy sources. Each watt saved flows straight to the bottom line. Similarly – cloud computing companies intensely scrutinize their server purchases – weighing some variation of this question: how much performance (and by extension, revenue) can I squeeze out of the equipment – versus the cost of procurement and operations. This is the essence of “efficiency”. And now – with Intel’s new Xeon 5500 processor – there’s great news for anyone building efficient cloud infrastructure. The Xeon 5500 can deliver up to 2.25X the computing performance at a similar system power envelope compared to Intel’s previous generation Xeon 5400 series1. (By the way – the Xeon 5400 is no efficiency slouch – as it’s been leading the industry-standard SpecPower results for two socket systems since the benchmark was created.2) Need more evidence of Xeon 5500 efficiency? Look no further than the amazing results announced by IBM – a score of 1860, which is a 64% leap over the previous high score for a two socket system.3 Results like this clearly demonstrate that the Xeon 5500 has the extremely efficient performance that cloud operators are seeking.
  2. Virtualization performance. If a cloud service provider has leveraged a virtualization layer in its architecture - the performance of virtual machines and the ratio of VMs to servers are key concerns. Enter the Xeon 5500 which boasts a stellar jump in virtualization performance, up to 2 times the previous generation Xeon 5400 series4 allowing virtualized clouds to squeeze even more capability out of their infrastructure.
  3. Adaptable. Cloud computing environments tend to be highly dynamic as usage ebbs and flows during the day, some applications scale rapidly while some shut down, and so on. To meet such shifting demand – it’s critical to have adaptable cloud building blocks. And here Intel’s Xeon 5500 shines: this processor has unique new intelligence to increase performance when needed (Intel Turbo Boost) and to reduce power consumption when demand falls (Intel Intelligent Power Management Technology).
  4. Designed for higher operating temperatures. Across the datacenter industry – there’s growing interest in the notion of running datacenters at warmer temperatures to conserve energy. For cloud computing mega-datacenters, this concept has been in practice for several years. But it’s not just the datacenter staff that needs to handle warmer climates - the equipment must tolerate the conditions as well. Intel’s Xeon 5500 has been designed to run at higher temperatures providing one more piece of the puzzle to enable more efficient cloud infrastructure environments5.
  5. 50% lower idle power. Cloud computing providers – like airlines and phone companies – need to run at the highest utilization possible to maintain a healthy P&L. Yet there are times when usage – and thus server utilization – drops and at these times, cloud service providers desire processors with low power consumption. The Xeon 5500 processor now boasts an idle power that’s up to 50% lower than the prior generation systems, reducing energy costs6.
  6. Advanced power management. Intel has incorporated special platform level power technologies into the Xeon 5500 platform – which open new avenues to managing server energy consumption beyond what’s already built into the processor. Intel Intelligent Power Node Manager is a power control policy engine that dynamically adjusts platform power to achieve the optimum performance-power ratio for each server. By setting user-defined platform energy policies – Node Manager can enable datacenter operators to increase server rack density while staying within a given power threshold. While results vary based on the type of application and server – Intel demonstrated up to 20% improvement in rack density by using Node Manager in a recent proof-of-concept with Baidu, a leading search engine7.
  7. High Performance Memory Architecture. Cloud computing and other highly scalable Internet services are often relying on workloads where it makes more sense to keep large volumes of memory in DRAM, close to the CPU, rather than on slower, more distant hard drives. “Memcached” – a distributed caching system used by many leading Internet companies – is but one example. The Intel Xeon 5500 offers several exciting memory architecture benefits over the previous generation: (1) Up to 3.5X the memory bandwidth8 by leveraging an integrated memory controller and Intel Quick Path Interconnect (QPI), (2) supports a larger memory footprint (144GB versus 128GB), and (3) DIMMs and QPI links automatically move to lower power states when not active. In these new caching and distributed workloads, where large memory architectures are crucial, the Intel Xeon 5500 offers real advantages.
  8. Perfect when paired with SSDs. Few technologies get datacenter gurus more excited than solid state drives – which can offer impressive performance gains over their rotating hard drive cousins at far lower energy consumption. But with SSDs that can read 1000 times more data into the CPU versus a HDD – you want a ravenous processing beast to handle the traffic. And – you’re catching on to the blog theme – the Xeon 5500 can provide up to 72% better performance using SSDs than even the previous generation Xeon systems9. Intel Xeon 5500 is truly a perfect engine to complement SSDs.
  9. Ideal for optimized server boards. For cloud infrastructure – where every watt is a pernicious tax – you need more than just an extremely efficient processor such as the Xeon 5500. You also need an optimized server platform that has been stripped of every unneeded feature, configured with world-class energy efficient components, and designed for reduced airflow that minimizes the use of fans. One such product is an Intel server motherboard – codenamed “Willowbrook” which has an impressively low idle power below 70W, considering it’s a dual Xeon 5500 performance rocket10.
  10. A competitive lever for cloud operators. Lastly, for a service provider scaling out its infrastructure – systems based on Intel Xeon 5500 processors could offer a competitive advantage versus service providers whose servers are 2 to 3 years old. Because of the performance leaps in Intel server processors in the past few generations – Intel Xeon 5500 based servers can handle the same performance load as up to three times the number of 3-year old dual core servers11. The benefit is clear: providing the same performance level but with far fewer servers means a leg-up on those service providers with more antiquated, less efficient infrastructure.

 

If you have made it through this lengthy top 10 list – you should have a better sense for the advantages of Intel’s latest processor for cloud computing environments. Of course, the best way to really see the benefits is to get an Intel Xeon 5500 based system from your preferred vendor and test with your own code.

 

1 - 11For Footnotes, Performance Background, and Legal information, please refer to the attached document.

3 Comments Permalink
3

The Intel® Xeon® 5500 Series Processor (aka Nehalem) officially stepped out from behind the curtain onto center stage today.  This processor is an engineering marvel…one that can intelligently provide phenomenal performance on demand, while also sipping power when not in use.

Any measure of energy efficiency consists of performance in conjunction with the amount power consumed, so let’s cover these “big” items first.

  • Performance:  As of March 30, 2009, Intel based 2 socket Xeon® 5500 series servers set at least 30 world performance records across a wide range of benchmarks that cover virtually every application type on the market. The performance results, just by themselves, are utterly amazing, and in general they are greater than 2x the Intel® Xeon® 5400 series processors (Harpertown).
  • System level power consumption:  The electricity bill is based on how much power the server consumes, so that is also an important part of the energy efficiency equation. In general, Intel® Xeon® 5500 (Nehalem) based servers consume equal or slightly less power under peak workloads vs. previous generation Intel® Xeon® 5400 based servers.  By increasing performance more than 2x over previous Intel server processors while keeping overall power consumption in check, this is a great recipe for energy efficient performance.  In addition, when servers are at idle or are not fully utilized, customers want them to consume the least amount of power possible. Because of some key new power management features built into Nehalem, system idle power is dramatically lower (up to 50% less) than previous generation Intel® Xeon® 5400 based servers.

Now let’s get into three of the “behind the curtain” details of how some of the energy efficiency improvements are achieved.

  1. Power gating:  When a core is inactive, the operating system can request the core to enter a deep C state. Xeon® 5500 series processors supports C6, which is called “power gating”. This essentially puts the core into such a low power state that it consumes very close to 0W when not in use.
  2. DIMM memory power management: Today’s servers often have a lot of DIMMs installed, but leaving them in their full power state all the time isn’t a very wise. The Xeon® 5500 processor can intelligently reduce DIMM power consumption when not active by using techniques such as clock gating (CKE) and putting the DIMMs in “sleep state”, called self-refresh.
  3. Increased # of performance states:  P-states enable the server to proportionally match the power consumption of the server to the desired performance output. For example, if the processor CPU utilization is less, the operating system may request a lower P-state. By doing this, the power consumption of the processor is reduced to match the lower performance required. All this happens dynamically and allows the processor to scale both performance and power up and down to intelligently meet the workload demands.

In summary, while it is interesting to get into these “behind the curtain details”, what matters most is the performance and power at a system level. Servers based on Intel® Xeon® 5500 Series Processors represent a quantum leap forward in terms of both performance and energy efficiency! Call up your favorite server vendor and “test drive” one today to see for yourself.  And…once you get your hands on one, let me know what you think.

3 Comments Permalink
0

For readers of my February Blog, I talked about being so excited that i felt like a kid on Christmas morning when it came to our upcoming Nehalem launch and shared a story about some customers I talked with.  Well I can now give you your presents and a little background on the experience I had back in February.

 

 

Time to play with our new technology toys.

 

Chris

0 Comments Permalink
0

Our new product, the Intel Xeon Processor 5500 series, has ushered in what we at Intel call a new generation of intelligent server processors. Before I wrote this blog I had to look up the definition of intelligence (American Heritage Dictionary):

In•tel•li•gence n 1.a. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge. b. The faculty of thought and reason.

In this context, I’d like to discuss two topics. (1) An Intelligent Product (2) An Intelligent Choice

An Intelligent Product: (the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge)

Key technology enhancements to the Xeon 5500 include a suite of new features and capabilities that enable servers utilizing these new processor to serve a wide range of server usages (from basic business to high performance computing) (from single threaded applications to well threaded applications) (from non virtualized to highly virtualized environments) and makes these servers adaptable to the environment you want to deploy it into.

              

ð       Intel Hyper-Threading Technology is back boosting performance for well threaded applications

ð       Intel Intelligent Power Technology adjusts server power consumption real time to workload

o       Automated Low Power States reduces CPU, Memory and I/O power without impacting performance

o        Integrated Power Gates dynamically turn cpu cores that are not in use to reduce idle power near 10W

ð       Intel Turbo-Boost Technology speeds up your processor when application demands peak

ð       Intel QuickPath Technology provides industry leading server bandwidth (up to 3.5x prior Xeon)

The benefits for IT and Business?

ð       A server platform that can adapt to your application environment allowing you to deploy it in one environment today with the knowledge you can repurpose it tomorrow, if needed

ð       A server platform that can adapt you changing workload demands over the course of a day, saving power when demands are low and better performance when you need it most

Read the Intel Xeon processor 5500 series platform brief to learn about these technologies

Visit this video about the new product and the technologies listed above

An Intelligent Choice: (the faculty of thought and reason)

Economic times are tough and we’re all struggling with spending choices (or not spending) at both a personal and corporate level. However, business spends about 2/3 of their IT budget maintaining existing servers (source IDC). IDC further estimates that 40% of the servers installed today are 4yr+ single core servers with another 40% being 3 year old dual-core. These servers are consuming a lot of valuable resources. With a heavy % of IT budget spent on operating costs, the challenge is that if you cut spending, you are cutting innovation. This limits business competitiveness.

What is the option? …. Server Refresh. Compared to installed single core Xeon servers, these new Xeon processors enable up to 9x performance per server, a 9:1 server consolidation opportunity (with flat performance), lowering operating costs by an estimated 90% and delivering an estimated up to 8 month payback on investment. That means that an investment in a new server today can pay for itself in less than a year, helping you to self fund more innovation or helping to boost the bottom line of your organization. If your environment is dual-core based, the opportunity is about a 3:1 consolidation opportunity.

               Download this pdf to understand the 8 month estimate

View a video demonstration highlighting the 9:1 consolidation and 3:1 consolidation

In summary the Xeon 5500 series is an intelligent product in it’s capability to adapt to both it’s application and user environment and an intelligent choice for IT investment delivering an estimated up to 8 month payback – much better than you can do in the stock market, bank or many other projects.

I think that this is the right product at the right time.  What do you think? ... I'd like to hear your reactions.

Chris

0 Comments Permalink
1

I was thinking about a catchy title when I suddenly recalled the ‘Look Who’s Talking’ movie series from a while back. After all catchy titles are key for blogs!.

Previously I shared some thoughts on overall TCO savings that could be achieved, performance benefits that can be realized and how to migrate from RISC to Intel architectures. We all agree that making a change for the sake of change is never a good thing and justifying a change in the current economic environment can be a challenging path. So let’s look at who is changing and the benefits they are realizing from making a change. (I do apologize for over-use of word change, this is not a political commercial)

  • BMW Group wanted to simplify management of their environment and reduce TCO of their proprietary RISC server infrastructure. BMW moved their SAP environment and achieved 2.75-3xperformance gains and greater energy efficiency and drove down cost.
  • Telefonica a major Telecom Service Provider in Europe migrated their mobile online billing system and achieved a 428%performance gain.
  • Florida Hospital moved their disaster recovery system and got higher availability, reduced recovery time and lower system maintenance costs

Changing architecture does not mean that you have to change the operating system and solution stack. In some cases IT organizations are choosing to retain their Solaris environment.

  • BT Vision wanted to triple their Data Center capacity without increasing their power consumption or consuming more space in their DataCenter. Deployed Solaris on Xeon and achieved 10xfaster performance in Solaris Applications, 25-50%increased availability and 80%savings on their underlying equipment

Hopefully these examples help in some way to show that you will not be the first trailblazer trying out something new and unproven.  IT Organizations have moved and are reaping the benefits of the change.

Finally being March 17th and Irish, I would like to wish you all a Happy St Paddy’s day!

1 Comments Permalink
0

In our previous post we noted that the state of the art power montoring in virtualized environments is much less advanced than power monitoring applied to physical systems.  There is a larger historical context, and economic implications in the planning and operation of data centers that make this problem worth exploring.

Let's look at a similar dynamic in a different context: In the region of the globe where I grew up, water used to be so inexpensive that residential use was not metered.  The water company would charge a fixed amount every month and that was it.  Hence, tenants in an apartment would never see a water bill.  The water bill was a predictable cost component in the total cost of the building and included in the rent.  Water was essentially an infinite resource and reflecting this fact, there were absolutely no incentives in the system for residents to reign in water use.

As the population increased, water became increasingly a more precious and expensive resource.  The water company started installing residential water meters, but bowing to tradition, landlords continued to pay the bills, which was still a very small portion of the overal operating costs.  Tenants still had no incentive to save water because they did not see the water bill.

Today there are very few regions in the world where water can be treated as an infinite resources.  The cost of water increased so much faster than other cost components to the point that landlords decided to expose this cost to tenants.  Hence the practice of tenants paying the specific consumption for the unit they occupy is common today.  Also, because this consumption is exposed at the individual unit level, the historical data can be used as the basis for the implementation of water conservation policies, for instance charging penalty rates for use beyond a certain threshold.

The use of power in the data center has been following a similar trajectory.  For many years the cost of power had been a noise level item in the cost of operating a data center.  It was practical to include the cost of electricity in the bill of the cost of the facilities.  Hence IT managers would never see the energy costs.  This situation is changing as we speak.  See for instance this recent article in Computerworld.

Recent Intel-based server platforms, such as the existing Bensley platform, and more recently, the Nehalem-EP platform to be introduced in March come with instrumented power supplies that allow the monitoring and control of power use at the individual server level.  This information allows compiling a historical record of actual power use that is much more accurate than the more traditional method of using derated nameplate power.

The historical information is useful for data center planning purposes by delivering a much tighter forecast, beneficial in two ways: by reducing the need to over-specify the power designed into the facility or by maximizing the amount of equipment that can be deployed for a fixed amount of power available.

From an operational perspective we can expect ever more aggressive implementations of power proportional computing in servers where we see large variations between power consumed at idle vs. power consumed at full load.  Ten years ago this variation used to be less than 10 percent.  Today 50 percent is not unusual.  Data center operators can expect wider swings in data center power demand.  Server power management technology provides the means to manage these swings, stay within a data center's power envelope, yet maintain existing service level agreements with customers.

There is still one more complication:  with the steep adoption of virtualization in the data center in the past two years starting with consolidation exercises, an increasing portion of business is being transacted using virtualized resources.  Under this new environment, using a physical host as the locus for billing power may not be sufficient anymore, especially in multi-tenant environments, where the cost centers for virtual machines running in a host may reside in different departments or even in different companies.

It is reasonable to expect that this mode of fine grained power management at the virtual machine level will take root in cloud computing and hosted environment where resources are typically deployed as virtualized resources.  Fine grained power monitoring and management makes sense in an environment where energy and carbon footpring is a major TCO component.  To the extent that energy costs are exposed to users along as the MIPS consumed, this information provides the checks and balances and the data to implement rational policies to manage energy consumption.

Based on the considerations above, we see a maturation process for power management practices in a given facility happening in three stages.

  1. Stage 1: Undifferentiated, one bill for the whole facility.  Power hogs and energy efficient equipment are thrown in the same pile.  Metrics to weed out inefficient equipment are hard to come by.
  2. Stage 2: Power monitoring at the physical host level implemented.  Exposes inefficient equipment.  Many installations are feeling the pain of increasing energy cost, but organizational inertia prevents passing costs to IT operations.  Power monitoring at this level may be too coarse grained, too little, too late for environments that are rapidly transitioning to virtualization with inadequate support for multi-tenancy.
  3. Stage 3: Power monitoring encompasses virtualized environments.  This capability would align power monitoring with the unit of delivery of value to customers.
0 Comments Permalink
0

Given the recent intense focus in the industry around data center power management and the furious pace of the adoption of virtualization, it is remarkable that the subject of power management in virtualized environments has received relatively little attention.

 

It is fair to say that power management technology has not caught with virtualization.

 

Here are a few thoughts on this particular subject, which I intend to elaborate in subsequent transmittals.

 

For historical reasons the power management technology available today had its inception in the physical world where watts consumed in a server can be traced to the watts that came through the power utility feeds.  Unfortunately, the semantics of power in virtual  machines have yet to be comprehensively defined to industry consensus.

 

For instance, assume that the operating system running  in a virtual image decides to transition the system to the ACPI S3 state, sleep to memory.  What we have now is the state of the virtual image preserved in the image's memory with the virtual CPU turned off.

 

Assuming that the system is not paravirtualized, the operating system can't tell if it's running in a physical or virtual instance. The effect of transitioning to S3 will be purely local to the virtual machine.  If the intent of the system operator was to transition the machine to S3 to save power, it does not work this way.   The virtual machine still draws resources from the host machine and requires hypervisor attention. Transitioning the host itself to S3 may not be practical as there might be other virtual machines still running, not ready to go to sleep.

 

Consolidation is another technology for reducing data center power consumption by driving up the server utilization rates.  Consolidation for power management is a blunt tool, where applications that used to run in a physical server are now virtualized and squished into a single physical host.  The applications are sometimes strange bedfellows.  Profiling might have been done to make sure they could coexist, as a priori, static exercise with the virtual machine instances treated as black boxes. There is no attempt to look at the workload profiles inside each virtualized instance and in real time.  Power savings come from an almost wishful side effect of repackaging applications formerly running in a dedicated server into virtualized instances.

 

A capability to map power to virtual machines, in both directions, from physical to virtual and virtual to physical would be useful from an operational perspective.  The challenge is twofold, first from a monitoring perspective because there is no commonly agreed method yet to prorate host power consumption to the virtual instances running within, and second from a control perspective.  It would be useful to schedule or assign power consumption to virtual machines, allowing end users tomake a tradeoff between power and performance.  Fine grained power monitoring would allow prorating power costs to application instances, introducing useful pricing checks and balances encouraging energy consumption instead of the more common method today of hiding energy costs in the facility costs.

0 Comments Permalink
0

Let’s face it; it’s getting harder to measure server density in rack units, and measuring by compute threads in a rack isn’t getting any easier with the core/thread counts increasing year over year.  I still remember from 12 years ago when Intel was acquiring companies who were really good at piecing together single core multi-processor systems and those systems were literally hanging from engine hoists (for demo purposes) because they were so large… I believe they had eight Intel Pentium Pro processors and 128MB of RAM. In comparison - today’s netbooks have more 4 times that amount of memory, in a base configuration.

Modern server micro-architectures have such a large increase in transistors alone, that it’s hard to equate the exponential growth in the complexity of the systems. While power must still be consumed, the same amount of power can be distributed across several cores and platforms now - which is more power efficient, but it also adds more complexity as the number of nodes increase. But just because you have more nodes, doesn’t mean that you can’t manage their efficiency.

David Ott (from the Intel Software Services Group) presents many of the provisioning/power/manageability problems at hand in the video below (5m16s), and explains how Intel is providing the 'touch points' to manage server platforms:

http://software.intel.com/media/videos/2/1/8/a/0/a/e/218a0aefd1d1a4be65601cc6ddc1520e_player.jpg

 

With the upcoming Intel Xeon 5500 Series Processors, not only do you have a high-performing platform; and in Intel fashion they’re also more power-efficient.  With the capabilities to self-throttle power usage via managed P-states per node or be managed via policies by group, time, etc.  Managing for servers isn’t new, but the way that Intel is doing it is a huge leap ahead in manageability at the node level.

 

So I ask:

  • What manageability tools are you using for your enterprise servers today?
  • Is Intel Node Manager on your (or your OEM's) roadmap to gather information on a ‘per server’ basis?
  • Would more discrete information enable you to run your datacenter more efficiently?
  • What manageability items do you struggle within your own datacenter, and what would you like to see in future platforms?

 

If Power Manageability is new to you, I highly suggest you check out Intel Dynamic Power Datacenter Manger, and if you're running a Linux based server - please check out http://www.lesswatts.org to ensure you have the latest ACPI compliant kernel.

 

And as a fun exit, here’s a video that we shot in one of our labs – further strengthening the need for virtualization

(and more importantly – the need for virtualized networks!)

0 Comments Permalink
0

Only a few years ago, customers seldom considered server energy efficiency when buying servers. Today, server energy efficiency is often one of the key purchase criteria. And for some customers, energy efficient performance is the #1 criteria. Going forward in time, it is expected that the majority of people will use energy efficient performance (sometimes referred to as performance/watt) when evaluating servers.

From a customer point of view, the request is simple: "I want both high performance and reduced power consumption…at the same time." From a product design viewpoint, the "opportunity" to reduce power while still improving performance comes with some unique tradeoffs that are often complex. How much performance is needed? How much can/should power consumption be reduced? If power consumption is reduced, what impact will that have on performance? Etc, etc.

Processor design cycles are quite long and are started many years before a product actually comes to market. Because of the long design cycle, there is comprehensive process at the beginning to determine product features based on expected market needs. At the time the Nehalem architecture was being developed, customers were just starting to evaluate servers based energy efficient performance, but the Nehalem processor design team decided to make energy efficiency a fundamental "feature" of the processor. The good news is the team correctly predicted the market requirements with the upcoming Intel® Xeon® 5500 Processors (aka. Nehalem). Servers based on Nehalem processors are expected to provide customers with exactly what they have been requesting…"knock your socks off" performance along with reduced power consumption.

As Wayne Gretzky once famously said: “A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.” With Nehalem, Intel is definitely skating to where the puck will be.

0 Comments Permalink
0

Every morning we hear about the staggering job losses mounting up in businesses around the world. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost so far. Unfortunately, no one seems immune from the impacts of this recession. In fact, the recession is now impacting the data center and a new segment of the work force is at risk – your servers!

Would you keep an employee who worked less than 4 hours per day, over-spent valuable resources and was someone you had to manage constantly – obviously, the answer is NO! That is the situation today with install base single-core servers.  Aging servers are a perfect target for downsizing in this tough economy. Industry analyst IDC estimates that there are approximately 30 million servers installed in businesses around the world and about 40% of those use single-core processors (4 years old or older).

Let’s look at the 2008 performance review of these single core servers.

ð       Excessive Spending Habits: For the performance they deliver, these servers take up too much space and over-consume power and cooling resources.

ð       Lazy Work Habits: A typical non virtualized server runs at only 10-15% utilization – meaning they sit idle a majority of your work day.

ð       Needs Excessive Management: Aging servers require more maintenance. Extended warranties are expensive (estimated $600-1200 per server depending on the type of server) and if you don’t extend the warranty, the risk of downtime is on IT and the business. While the costs to maintain a server vary widely , during a recent discussion with Forrester research, they indicated that an aging server can cost up 3x the costs of an in-warranty server (under standard 3 yr manufacturer support).

Continuing to use these old servers is not a wise business strategy. But if you fire your existing infrastructure, who can you hire to do the work? Simple, you hire fewer new multi-core servers running virtualization to replace a large number of install base servers.

But, is replacing them worth the effort … I mean, why fix what ain’t broke? About 2/3 of IT’s budget is consumed maintaining existing infrastructure (source Gartner), leaving a measly 1/3 for innovation and value add business capability. So in this recession, unless you are focused on reducing OpEx, the IT budget that you are cutting is likely restricting your business competitiveness and new service delivery - the value of innovation.

Replacing old servers with new offers both cost and productivity advantages for IT in addition to improved services and competitiveness for business. Read some of the success stories from businesses in 2008 where proactive IT investment commonly resulted in 30-40% reductions in total costs, enhanced business services, improved competitiveness and rapid financial ROI. In fact, the business ROI on replacing an old server with new is staggering and in many cases can pay for itself in less than 12 months, by reducing power / cooling costs, avoiding new construction, simplifying and reducing maintenance costs, reducing applicaiton and OS licensing costs and more.

What characteristics should you look for in a new server hire? (to maximize this savings and accelerate ROI)

ð       Versatile Performance. Consider a wide range of benchmarks and application usages when evaluating capability of the server you intend to hire.  Servers hired today for a specific task may likely get re-purposed over their lifetime.

               Also ... if your workload is specialized and data demanding (like database / enterprise resource planning / business intelligence) consider a specialized

               server with unique skills, like larger compute, I/O and memory scalability to handle these larger workloads with increased reliability and headroom for peak loads.

ð       Energy Efficiency. Newer multi-core servers feature nearly 10x the performance / watt of single core servers. Use the SPECPower benchmark to assess which servers are the most energy efficient.

ð       Virtualization. When virtualizing servers, hire servers that can support robust consolidation ratios and built for flexibility and versatility. Many new hardware-assist technologies help boost the ability to migrate virtual machines (application/OS combination) from one server to another.

ð       Standardization. Unlike hiring employees where diversity is valued and encouraged, using a smaller number of reference designs in your IT environment, can lower operating and support costs.

A final consideration for hiring new servers is total cost of ownership. Just like hiring people, you must consider the incidental or hidden costs behind the salary and sign-on bonus (do these still exist today?). The average life for a server is 4 years. Buying an inexpensive server for your needs today may optimize today’s budget but may end up costing you over the long run in software licensing, power/cooling. Intel IT recently did an ROI analysis on buying higher end processors and found that using higher end processors reduced TCO significantly – by doing more with less.

Last year, Intel IT fired about 20,000 servers and more are expected to receive pink slips in 2009 - read more about this in the 2008 Intel ITannual perfomance report

If your goals are to lower costs, improve services and boost revenue while increasing business competitiveness, then replacing aging server infrastructure is an Intelligent Investment. Learn more at www.intel.com/go/xeon

 

Are your single core servers at risk of losing their jobs?  If not, they should be!

 

So the Question is ... Will You Cut IT Costs and Boost Business Competitiveness by downsizing your Server Infrastructure in 2009?

 

Chris

0 Comments Permalink
0

The current economic environment is unprecedented in our lifetime and is having multiple impacts on Enterprise decision making. IT spending is under severe scrutiny with IT budget reductions forecasted throughout most Enterprises in ’09. Even with reduced budgets, IT needs to continue to improve business productivity and competitiveness. So what can you do to manage all these conflicting conditions?

Maybe this type of environment represents an opportunity to make some changes with respect to your IT Policy. Could this be a good time to simplify and standardize your IT environment by looking at a broader range of choices that are now available. These choices may not have existed in the past due to some of your decision criteria not being meet for your hardware or software needs. Hardware and software evolve at a rapid pace, and the capabilities to meet your needs are significantly different today than what was available 5-7 years ago when you made previous decisions.

Equipment nearing the end of depreciation cycles or lease contracts offer another opportunity to look at the cost and performance of your existing architectures Vs other architectures that are available today. In my previous blog I shared some thoughts on performance and pricing of RISC systems Vs x86 based platforms. There are significant savings that can be made be choosing x86 hardware without trading off on your performance needs. Selecting x86 hardware could enable you to execute your IT refresh and replacement strategy in a reduced Capex budget environment. Sometimes it seems that offsetting a purchase may be a prudent thing to do, but at some point you will have to replace these systems to meet business productivity requirements. In the meantime you will have to spend incremental budget paying extra $’s for maintenance and support for systems that you had planned to replace and you may also not meet the demands placed on you to support your business needs. I also read recently that under the proposed US Stimulus package there may be some provisions for accelerating depreciation on new equipment purchases. This could be another factor to consider in terms of which option will cost you most in the long-run.

One other thought I had was the ability to re-allocate $’s within your overall TCO to spend on other aspects of your solution needs. If you could save money on the hardware cost would it free up $’s for you to spend on the overall solution?. For example could you afford to pay the software license costs and support more users for your ERP environment.

Consolidating older generation RISC based platforms to current x86 based platforms could be another way to offset some of the associated costs associated with maintaining and supporting your RISC environment.  I read a paper recently published by Dell where they talked about the performance difference between V440 SPARC Servers and todays R900 systems. They talked about the R900m being 14 times as fast as V440. This led me to conclude that I could consolidate a distributed workload from a number of older V440s and run that workload on one system. This sounds like a pretty good deal to me as I can save some space in my datacenter, save some energy costs, probably get some savings on software license and support costs.

Another factor to consider is the whole issue of payback. In the current environment everyone is being asked to justify the payback on their investment to be 12 months or less. What if I said that you could get a 9 month payback on your investment in a new hardware platform purely on the basis of savings from power & cooling savings and lower OS maintenance costs. Would these types of savings be enough to justify your investment and consolidating multiple legacy RISC servers to a current x86 platform?. Well that type of payback is attainable, and there are other savings like software license costs, administrator and operator costs that are not really included in the calculations.

Ok, so the counterside to my argument is that it is hard to move a workload from RISC to x86. The savings I get from moving will not be offset by the money I spend to move. It is a fair argument, but there are Customers who have done the transition and saved some significant money by doing so. Avis in Europe are one example that comes to mind where they talk about reduce their TCO by 50% moving from RISC to x86 platform

One of the other comments I often hear relates to it being technically hard to move my solution if it is running on UNIX/RISC to x86 offering. I agree you are moving move one architecture to another and there are some challenges to do so, but there are resources out there to help you. Principled Technologies wrote two reports recently that discussed how you could move your Oracle database to Solaris or Linux running on Xeon. Don’t worry, these were not marketing papers, they actually did this migration in a real lab environment and documented the technical ‘how to’.

Ok, so these are some of my thoughts, let me know what you think?.

0 Comments Permalink
1 2 3 4 5 Previous Next

Filter Blog

By author: By date: By tag: