Hi
Sure not a problem, i am never really consider power any much in a
rack since there a other stuff in my racks that sucks a lot more power
then a p4 dual machine :)
Per
E-mail: p...@norhex.com [1]
http://www.linkedin.com/in/perqvindesland [2]
--- Original message follows ---
SUBJECT: Re: [CentOS] Intel Atom systems?
FROM: Peter Arremann
TO: "CentOS mailing list"
DATE: 23-05-2009 20:55
On Saturday 23 May 2009 02:15:54 pm Per Qvindesland wrote:
> I am not so sure that I would go for something with an Atom
processor
> installed if it is going to be on 24/7 then I would rather if price
> has to be low, look at building a machine with a p4 dual core, they
> are really cheap and don't mind being on 24/7 after all Atom has
half
> the processing speed as a pentium m processor.
>
> Per
Per, sorry to be so direct - but in my opinion that's a horrible
recommendation because within a few months, you spent more on power
than the
system costs... Even with speedstep properly configured, you're going
to burn a
lot more power on any P4.Doing the same basic file and print
services, the Atom
boxes we built used around 35W average vs 140W on the P4 dual cores
that they
replaced. Only had one failure so far but we think that was user
error -
something seems to have blocked the fan because all other systems had
lots of
dust in it and the failed unit was perfectly clean....
Overall, the Atom boxes worked great for us. We didn't have a
specific reason
not to choose VIA, atom boards were just easier to find, at least
when we were
doing this. Can't help you with a specific model board though since
we only
needed a single lan port...
Peter.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Links:
------
[1] http://webmail.norhex.com/#
[2] http://www.linkedin.com/in/perqvindesland
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
