The chassis is a complete redesign, boasting a nicely trimmed up-front LCD panel display that can be used to configure a surprising
number of chassis operating parameters. The panel has a Web UI counterpart that matches the display exactly, easing "remote
hands"-type administration. Up to 16 blades can fit into a single 10U c-Class chassis with a maximum power draw of 3.6kW.
The N+N power supply configuration is also nicely handled, with six hot-swap power units laying low at the bottom of the chassis.
One of the more attractive aspects of blade systems is the ability to mix and match different types of blades within a single
chassis. The HP c-Class currently offers three different ProLiant processing blades: the BL460c, an Intel EM64T-based blade;
the BL465c, the AMD Opteron counterpart; and the BL480c, a 2P Intel EM64T-based blade. In addition to these blades, HP also
offers disk-only blades, which can handle as many as six 2.5-inch SAS drives that appear as local disks to the immediately
adjacent blade in the chassis — a very nice touch.
Any of these blades may occupy a single chassis in any density. An interesting and welcome detail is the single internal USB
port on each blade ostensibly present to allow use of a USB licensing dongle, because, unfortunately, many applications are
licensed in this fashion.
Our c-Class review unit contained preproduction BL460c blades sporting the new Intel quad-core Xeon CPUs. Running at 1.866Ghz
with a 4MB L2 cache, a 1066 Mhz FSB, and 4GB of RAM per socket, these BL460c blades proved quite powerful. They turned in
respectable SPEChpc scores, due in no small part to the 16-socket limitation of the testing balanced against four cores per
socket. However, the lower clock rate per core and limited FSB may have cost HP in the SPEChpc tests, as their scores fell
generally in the middle of the three solutions. It's also quite possible that more time needs to be spent on compiler optimizations
for these newborn chips.
Like all the other vendors, HP chose InfiniBand as the interconnect for the HPC tests using an external Voltaire switch. But
unlike Sun's X8400 blades, much of the c-Class I/O is handled internally with switching modules. This backplane switching
architecture provides a closer relationship between the blades and significantly reduces cabling, but proved to be problematic
in the lab: The HP engineers struggled with odd issues relating to InfiniBand connectivity and performance throughout the
testing. It wasn't until the very end of the day, in fact, that they were able to complete the SPEChpc suite to satisfy the
testing requirements.
 |
| The Bottom Line |
Dell PowerEdge 1955 Blade System
Dell, dell.com
|
 Very Good 8.3 |
|
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Availability |
8 |
25% |
 |
| Performance |
9 |
20% |
|
| Scalability |
9 |
20% |
|
| Management |
7 |
15% |
|
| Serviceability |
8 |
10% |
|
| Value |
8 |
10% |
|
|
|
Cost:
$75,622 as tested, including 10 blades, external InfiniBand switch, cabling
Platforms:
Linux, Windows Server 2003
Bottom Line:
Dell’s PowerEdge 1955 surprised us in the SPEChpc tests, turning in the best score by far, and it offers unique features such
as the embedded Avocent KVM. In spite of being the smallest chassis (7U) in the test, it offers a significant amount of processing
power. The management can run stand-alone or integrated into Dell’s OpenManage framework, but isn’t terribly impressive either
way. All things considered, the PowerEdge 1955 offers the best bang for the buck.
|
|
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|
|
| The Bottom Line |
HP BladeSystem c-Class
HP, hp.com
|
| Very Good 8.3 |
|
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Availability |
8 |
25% |
|
| Performance |
8 |
20% |
|
| Scalability |
9 |
20% |
|
| Management |
8 |
15% |
|
| Serviceability |
9 |
10% |
|
| Value |
8 |
10% |
|
|
|
Cost:
$66,902 as tested with eight blades
Platforms:
Linux, Windows Server 2003
Bottom Line:
HP’s brand-new quad-core Intel blades made their debut in this test, delivering eight total cores across two sockets in each
half-height blade. The c-Class offers an impressive 16 blades per 10U chassis, and an equally impressive array of I/O options,
including integrated Cisco switching modules. We did see some relatively minor hardware problems in the lab, possibly due
to the pre-release status of the blades. Overall, the c-Class is solidly built and reasonably priced for a high-end blade
system.
|
|
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|
|
| The Bottom Line |
Sun Blade 8000 Modular System
Sun Microsystems, sun.com
|
| Very Good 8.2 |
|
| criteria |
score |
weight |
| Availability |
8 |
25% |
|
| Performance |
7 |
20% |
|
| Scalability |
9 |
20% |
|
| Management |
9 |
15% |
|
| Serviceability |
8 |
10% |
|
| Value |
8 |
10% |
|
|
|
Cost:
$101,000 as tested with four blades
Platforms:
Solaris x86, Linux, Windows Server 2003
Bottom Line:
Sun’s system is more of a consolidated server structure than true blades. Each server module offers a four-socket Opteron
mainboard with up to 64GB of RAM, and Sun fits 10 modules into a 19U chassis that’s just bursting with I/O options. Its surprisingly
poor performance in the lab is likely due to poor optimization on the SPEChpc tests. Either way, it cost Sun on the final
score -- but the blades are impressively powerful, and a great match for a virtualization infrastructure.
|
|
About our Reviews and Scoring Methodology
|
|
Talkback
E-mail
Printer Friendly
Reprints
