Home > Intel Communities > Open Port IT Community > The Server Room > Blog > Tags > eco-technology
1 2 Previous Next

The Server Room Blog

25 Posts tagged with the eco-technology tag
0

Running multiple Unix environments across a range of locations adds increased complexity and cost to the IT environment. I came across an interesting case study and wanted to highlight some of the key findings

 

YPF SAis the largest company in Argentina operating in the Oil and Gas industry. The company has 29 gas plants around Argentina running different Unix environments such as HP-UX, AIX and Solaris.

 

YPF SA consolidated their SAP ERP and Oracle DB environment from multiple Unix environments to Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 with integrated virtualization running on Intel Xeon based platforms from IBM System X

 

Some of the key findings to highlight

  • Key requirement from Unix Administration Team that "migrating from old RISC/Unix and proprietary servers to open and flexible platforms would pose no risk to the reliability, availability and performance of the systems"
  • Positive impact on cost and performance; Lowered costs, simplified management and increased compatibility
  • Reduction in costs especially when compared to license costs of RISC based platforms
  • Increased performance and availability drove decision to scale with RHEL and Xeon
  • Ability to leverage Redhat integrated virtualization. Free up internal hardware and technical resources for other projects

 

 

I guess the combination of Redhat and Intel deliver the business results that customers are seeking. What do you think?

0 Comments Permalink
1

Are you a developer writing applications to run on the Solaris operating system?. Are you looking for ways to optimize your Solaris solution on industry standard architecture based on Intel microprocessor? If you answer yes to either of these questions then please read on.

 

Intel and SUN have been working closely together to optimize the Solaris operating system on the Intel Xeon 5500 processor. Most of you probably know the Xeon 5500 better by its product codename Nehalem. The Xeon 5500 is the the product that fits into 2 socket platforms.

 

SUN have just published a very compelling quick reference guidethat will assist both Developers and System Administrators looking to optimize Solaris solutions on Xeon based processors. The guide talks about the work that Intel and SUN are doing together, technical descriptions of specific features and capabilities that can be implemented in the Solaris OS to optimize the capabilities of the Xeon.

 

I have just finished reading this and it is a very compelling paper covering topics such as

- How Solaris takes advantage of Intel Turbo Boost Technology to use available power headroom to deliver higher performance based on workload demand

- How Solaris can take advantage of new Intel Quickpath Interconnect (better known as QPI) and other innovations in the OS to reduce memory latency

- How Solaris performance counters help to better manage workloads

- How Solaris takes advantage of many of the power efficiency capabilities in the processor. Things like Power Aware Dispatched in Solaris enable the processor to stay longer in idle states. In non tech talk this saves power.

 

Solaris has been a tried and tested operating system for along time for companies running their most business critical workloads. This paper talks about the combination of Solaris and Xeon to deliver improved reliability and availability for these critical workloads. Detail information on predictive self healing, fault management, leveraging Intel Machine Check Architecture and more all included in this paper.

 

Probably my favourite section is around the developer tools optimizations and the different tools available for developers that want to run and optimize their applications on Solaris and Xeon.

 

Ok, I'll stop waxing lyrical now. This is a very compelling paper and it does certainly construe that Solaris and Xeon 5500 could be the perfect combination for your Solaris solution. What do you think?

1 Comments Permalink
1

The debate on how to best increase system capacity to accommodate growing applications has raged on for years; “scale up” with more CPU, memory, and I/O, or “scale out” with loosely connected systems.    Scaling out by adding networked systems to increase capacity has been a good economical solution for many IT managers because it allows them to grow by using less expensive, industry standard building blocks.  However, there are some notable exceptions to this line of thought.  One is that the class of applications that require shared memory and large database support are much better suited to run on a single, expandable system that scales up.  These are typically transaction processing, business intelligence and ERP solutions.   Until now, IT managers running applications that require scale-up systems larger than 4 or 8 CPUs have had limited platform choices and most were proprietary and expensive RISC-based servers.

 

The other problem with the scale out approach is the people, facilities, software and overhead costs and complexity of managing very large numbers of servers, which can grow to a point where the costs outweigh the performance and system cost benefits.  The industry solution to achieving better ROI has been to consolidate multiple scale-out servers onto single industry standard scale-up servers with virtualization solutions.  This is a good solution, but is limited by the number of application loads the IT manager feels comfortable placing on a single server, given the need to maintain peak performance and availability for each application.

 

Well, it looks like the scale-up, scale-out debate is about to take another turn.  In the server product update Intel gave on May 26th, they talked about new levels of system scalability and choice supported by the upcoming Nehalem-EX processor.  This processor will support systems that scale up to 8 sockets natively (shared memory, without any additional silicon), and up to 16 sockets and higher with node controllers from system manufactures that allow single systems to share memory beyond 8 sockets.   So far there are over 15 different designs from 8 OEMs that offer 8 socket or higher scalability.  But of course, for the class of application where scaling is important, socket count doesn’t tell the whole story of what’s needed for scalable performance.  Thread support, key for transaction processing and virtualization, scales at the rate of 16 threads per socket with 8 cores and Hyper Threading (2 threads per core).  That would be 128 threads for an 8-socket system, and 256 threads for 16 sockets.   And in order to keep those threads fed with data close to the CPU, each processor supports up to 24 MB of shared cache (1.5X current generation Xeon), and an impressive 16 memory slots per socket or 128 DIMMs on an 8-socket system.  In addition, the Scalable Memory Interconnect gives these systems 9 times the memory bandwidth of today’s top Xeon processor.  Finally, four QuickPath interconnect links per socket allow for high-bandwidth sharing of data across the system.

 

So the net of it is that the industry is going to see a broad selection of highly scalable, next-generation servers that significantly extend the economic advantage of industry standard scale-up solutions for business-critical, large database, and high-end virtualization/consolidation deployments.     I would expect these systems to give IT managers a very cost-effective alternative to the much more expensive and proprietary RISC-based servers they use today.

 

What are your thoughts?  Mike

 

Related Topics:

 

 

 

 

1 Comments Permalink
1

I spend a lot of time thinking about computing efficiency, but there's an interesting statistic that really blows the doors off of what computing represents to the world's sustainability.  According to Gartner, if you measure all of the energy savings that computing can bring to our planet, 2% is from making computing platforms more efficient.  A whopping 98% stems from how we utilize computing resources make how we work and live more efficient.  The sources of this efficiency are vast but many come immediately to mind...telecommunting, design of products via workstations vs. physical prototype models, downloading music via iTunes negating the need to produce millions of CDs.  If more proof were needed you just need to look through the government stimulous package to see how critical the role technology plays in driving more efficiencies across industries.

 

When we created the Data Center Efficiency Challenge we specifically pointed out that part of this competition would be judged not on the efficiency of the datacenter but on how the datacenter was making the organization more efficient.  To take this notion further we've started a new competition...on JustMeans.com...to spur more discussion on how companies are utilizing technology to re-map the way they do business for an energy-aware 21st century world.  Check it out.

1 Comments Permalink
0

In this installment on uses of server power management we continue the discussion on using this capability for other uses beyond server rack density.

Intel(r) Data Center Manager (Intel DCM) is a software development kit that can provide real time information to optimize data center operations.  It provides a comprehensive list of publish/subscribe event mechanisms that can form the basis of a sophisticated data center management infrastructure integrating multiple applications where applications get notified of relevant thermal and power events and can apply appropriate policies.

These policies can span a wide range of potential actions:  dialing back power consumption to bring it down below a reference threshold or to reduce thermal stress on the cooling system.  Some actions can be complex, such as migrating workloads across hosts in a virtualized environment, powering down equipment or even performing coordinated actions with building management systems.

Intel DCM also provides inlet temperature or front panel thermals along with a historical record that can be used to identify trouble spots in the data center.  This information provides insights to optimize the thermal design of the data center.  The actions needed to fix trouble spots need not be expensive at all; they may involve no more than relocating a few perforated tiles or installing blanking panels and grommets to minimize air leaks in the raised metal floor.  Traditionally, the hardest part has been identifying the trouble spots, involving time consuming temperature and air flow measurements. Intel Data Center Management provides much of this data ready made from operations. Typically this type of analysis is done by a consulting team and the cost of this exercise is high, anywhere between $50,000 to a $150,000 for a 25,000 square foot data center.  This analysis yields a single snapshot in time which becomes gradually more inaccurate as  the equipment in the data center is refreshed and reconfigured.

Deployment scaling can range from a small business managing a few co-located servers in a shared rack in a multi-tenant environment to organizations managing thousands of servers.

The event handling capability is an software abstraction implemented by the Intel DCM SDK running in a management console.  From an architectural perspective, and the fact that the number of nodes managed can range in the hundreds, it makes more sense to implement this capability as software rather than firmware.  Node Manager is implemented as firmware and it typically controls one server. The choice of SDK over a self-standing management application was also deliberate.  Although Intel DCM comes with a reference GUI to manage a small number of nodes as a self-standing application, it shines when it's used as a building block for higher level management applications.  The integration is done through a Web services interface. Documentation for Intel DCM can be found in http://software.intel.com/sites/datacentermanager/.

0 Comments Permalink
5

I was thinking about what to write in my next blog and what I could share beyond what I have written previously about Intel Vs RISC in terms of TCO, performance and the customers that are choosing to move.

 

Luckily I didn't have to think too long on a Friday morning as a a topic came to mind instantly. There are numerous articles flying around this morning that picked up on the Oracle comments yesterday about how SPARC based systems compare to Intel. Thanks for providing me with an appropriate topic.

 

So in case you missed it, there was a question and answer session with Larry Ellison. When asked about SPARC, this was the reply "SPARC is much more energy efficient than Intel while delivering the same performance on a per socket basis. This is not a green issue, its an economic issue. Today, database centers are paying as much for electricity to run their computers as they pay to buy computers. SPARC machines are much less expensive to run than Intel machines"

 

1) SPARC more energy efficient than Intel?  Seriously, in what parallel universe does that exists?

SUN continues to use watts per thread as measure of energy efficiency. The recognized industry standard benchmark for measuring energy efficiency is SPECpowerand I don't see any SPARC based results in the 91 results published. The absence of a result certainly says something very clear to me - no story.

 

These UltraSPARCT2+ systems get loaded with a lot of memory to deliver the their results, so when you look at overall system power (what people care about) they are not as energy efficient as Intel based systems.

 

SPECpower is effectively based of SPECJbb-2005 so another way of loking at this is to look at the SPECJbb-2005 results for a 4 socket UltraSPARcT2+ system and a Xeon 7400 system. The 4s UltraSPARCT2+ delivers 693k BOPs while Xeon 7400 is 532kBOPs. So you conclude that SPARC is better than Xeon?. That would be the wrong conclusion

UltraSPARCT2+ system would consume 1525 watts Vs Xeon 7400 at 816 watts. If you look at BOPs per watt (another way of looking at energy efficiency and performance) then you would see that Xeon 7400 is 43% more energy efficient. Doing a similar comparison with Xeon 5400 (I haven't even talked about our latest Xeon 5500, Nehalem) would be up to 77% more efficient than UltraSPARCT2+.

 

And lastly before I forget to mention the 4s UltraSPARCT2+ had 128GB memory and costs over $150,000for the system, while Xeon 7400 based system had 64GB memory and costs around $32,000.

 

2) SPARC deliver same performance on a per socket basis?

2S Xeon 5500 has performance leadership over 2S UltaSPARCT2+ across a wide range of benchmarks. Up to 70% more performance and up to 60% lower system cost. 4S Xeon 7400 has price/performance leadership over 4S UltraSPARCT2+, UltraSPARCT2+ results achieved with system loaded with lots of memory that drives the cost up to 3-4Xthat of Xeon 7400 system

 

3) SPARC machine are less expensive to run?. I can't for the life of me work this one out!.

Hardware systems based on Intel have leading price/performance (read cheaper), lower energy needs (so electrivity bill lower) and any software product with a license per core strcuture is less expensive on Xeon system than an 8 core UltraSPARcT2+ (which also has higher multipler per core)

 

That's all for now folks. I just wanted to share some data on why I know that SPARC machines are much MORE expensive to run than Intel machines

5 Comments Permalink
2

Of course changing a light bulb is easier. But did you know that the power savings benefits of changing a single server are about equal to changing three light bulbs and the economics of replacing either is similar.

Old

New

Savings

Light Bulb

60 W

13 W

47 W

source

Server (peak power)

394 W

244 W

150 W

old server

new server

Server (idle power)

226 W

82 W

144 W

ð        Energy Star estimatesthat replacing a light bulb with a single compact fluorescent can save $30 over its lifetime and pay for itself in 6 months.

ð        Intel estimatesare that replacing 9 racks of older servers with just one rack of new servers can save up to $765,000 over four years and pay for itself in as few as 8 months. 

While many of us no longer question changing older incandescent light bulbs with more energy efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs because of economic and eco-friendly reasons, many businesses retain older servers in their environment because they still work. About 3 months ago when talking to IDC, they shared an estimate that they expect there to be about 32 million servers supporting businesses around the world in 2009 and about 40% of them are more than 4 years old (making them single core processor technology). That is a lot of old single-core technology.

These single core servers take up a lot of space, resources and power/cooling infrastructure.  Newer servers consume less power (about 150W on average based on test results with industry standard benchmark SPECpower found at www.spec.org), deliver more performance (up to 9x), come with a new warranty, and support technologies to enable consolidation that can reduce OS, application and other costs that vary per server.  The combination of these savings balanced with the costs and effort to replace them, migrate applications and validate the new environment can deliver a rapid payback and dramatic savings.  You can estimate the savings yourself using this server refresh savings estimator.

And since power per server is lower, you don’t need to replace the rack infrastructure (unless you want to) … similar to how you don’t need a new light fixture for compact fluorescent light bulbs.

While it will take more work to change your server (than a light bulb), the additional work is sure worth the effort as many customers have learned (www.intel.com/references). Learn more about server technology in the new Server Learning Center located here.

QUESTION OF THE DAY:

How many engineers does it take to change a light bulb? … a server?

chris

 

 



2 Comments Permalink
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
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
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
1

Question: Is this thing for real?

Answer: Yes, we are here to answer your questions. Thanks for joining.

 

That's real dialogue from our recent "Live Chat" forum that brought together Intel Experts on XEON 7400-series product, Intel Architecture, Server Platforms, Visual Computing, Energy, and many other interesting topics. Live Chat is so new to the tech enthusiast, many were'nt sure we were real people and not internet bots....

 

Question: Are you for real or is this a bot?

Answer: I'm real... no bots today. :^)

 

The topics included virtualization, intel architecture, gaming, processor TDP, and many others. Check out the transcripts to see what all the chatting is about...

 

Live Chat: North America

 

Live Chat: Asia Pacific

1 Comments Permalink
0

A 45nm 6-core QnA

Posted by Chris P_Intel Oct 3, 2008

Following my earlier blog, I promised to share answers to some of the more common questions I get from customers on 45nm and mostly about the newest product we have on 6-core 45nm: the Xeon processor 7400 series.

 

1. What does 45nm really mean? A nanometer represents a distance that is one billionth of a meter in length. 45nm represents the width of a single transistor and is used to describe the manufacturing technology Intel uses to create our latest generation of processors. Because of the small 45nm transistor size, Intel is able fit 2 million transistors on the period at the end of this sentence.

 

2. Are all 45nm transistors the same? No. Materials used in silicon manufacturing process can vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. Intel switched over to a high-k dielectric material (Halfnium) that helps dramatically reduce leakage current – improving the performance/watt characteristic of our processors.

 

3. What OEM products feature 6-core 45nm products? Servers based on the processor are expected to be announced from over 50 system manufacturers around the world, including four-socket rack servers from Dell, Fujitsu, Fujitsu-Siemens, Hitachi, HP, IBM, NEC, Sun, Supermicro and Unisys. There are four-socket blade servers from Egenera, HP, Sun and NEC and there are server designs that scale up to 16-sockets from IBM, NEC and Unisys.

 

4. How does 6-core affect my software licensing? Just like with other multi-core processors, licensing will depend on the software vendor. With quad-core most ISVs elected to license by socket or processor meaning that the performance enhancements came “for free” as the number of cores are increased. Recently VMware updated their definition of a “processor” to include up to 6-cores per processor (learn more) meaning that with VMware ESX 3.5 update 2 and Intel Xeon processor 7400 series, IT can deploy a higher density of virtual machines per server without an incremental increase in licensing costs. Everyone does it differently – so do your homework.

 

Other common questions circle around IT usage trends and how this technology can really be applied. Here is an interesting (and somewhat long) video where Intel VP and CIO Diane Bryant discusses with executives from Yahoo, Oracle, MySpace and Verisign about the challenges they face and how technology is helping them. If you choose to listen you will find answers to questions (paraphrased) like?

 

  • What are some of the top challenges IT faces today? How can technology help?

  • Is 6 core performance too much? Does IT have the ability inside their environment to take advantage of this additional compute capacity?

  • Is the software ecosystem is ready for multi-core? Can today's applications take advantage of it?

  • How are customers using Virtualization today and how do they see it changing over time?

  • When virtualizing ... how does IT view MP servers (4 socket) vs DP (2 socket)?

  • When deploying next generation technology, how important is the power capacity of the IT environment when selecting technology?

  • Are Intel Xeon servers powerful and reliable enough to consider moving away from RISC or other proprietary architectures?

 

If I missed your burning question, just ask … I’d be happy to share. Chris

0 Comments Permalink
0

Anisha Ladha, Intel’s e-waste Program Manager talks about the Climate Savers Computing Initiative and how everyone can make a difference. Watch this video to see how individuals and companies can take steps to reduce the computing carbon footprint...

 

 

 

 

0 Comments Permalink
1 2 Previous Next