Network Test– PassMark Advanced Network Test
For the updated network test, I used PassMark’s client/server based Advanced Network Test. I used the Compute Module running Windows 2003 Server as a “client” and ran two tests using two other machines as the required “servers”. The first “server”: an eMachines desktop and the second “server”: one of the remaining two Compute Modules in the MFSYS25. The reason I used two machines as “servers” was because I wanted to test both internal and external traffic going through the Ethernet Switch Modules.
Note: The NICs on all three machines were set to Gigabit/Full Duplex.
Server 1 – External Test
Linksys Gigabit Ethernet Controller
Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium
Server 2 – Internal Test
Intel MFS5000SI Compute Module
Intel Pro/1000 EB Backplane Connection with I/O Acceleration
Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Enterprise
Current page: Network Test– PassMark Advanced Network TestPrev Page Memory Tests: Sandra Next Page Pros
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
This is not a new concept. HP & IBM already have Blade servers. HP has one that is 6U and is modular. You can put up to 64 cores in it. Maybe Tom's could compare all of the blade chassis.Reply
Also I did not see any pricing on this. Did i miss it somewhere???Reply
Are the blades in IBM's and HP's solutions having to carry hard drives to operate? Or are you talking of certain model or what are you talking about anyway I'm lost in your general comparison. "They are not new cause those guys have had something similar/the concept is old."Reply
Why isn't the poor network performance addressed as a con? No GigE interface should be producing results at FastE levels, ever.Reply
So, When you gonna start folding on it :pReply
Did you contact Intel about that network thing. There network cards are normally top end. That has to be a bug.
You should have tried to render 3d images on it. It should be able to flex some muscles there.
Now frankly, this is NOT a computational server, and i would bet 30% of the price of this thing, that the product will be way overpriced and one could buid the same thing from normal 1U servers, like Supermicro 1U Twin.Reply
The nodes themselves are fine, because the CPU-s are fast. The problem is the build in Gigabit LAN, which is jut too slow (neither the troughput nor the latency of the GLan was not ment for these pourposes).
In a real cumputational server the CPU-s should be directly interconnected with something like Hyper-Transport, or the separate nodes should communicate trough build-in Infiniband cards. The MINIMUM nowadays for a computational cluster would be 10G LAN buid in, and some software tool which can reduce the TCP/IP overhead and decrease the latency.
less its a typo the bench marked older AMD opterons. the AMD opteron 200s are based off the 939 socket(i think) which is ddr1 ecc. so no way would it stack up to the intel.Reply
The server could be used as a Oracle RAC cluster. But as noted you really want better interconnects than 1gb Ethernet. And I suspect from the setup it makes a fare VM engine.Reply
I priced a full chassis out for a client, and it was under 20k...Reply
It can't be under 20K.Reply
I reallty want to know what the price of this server is.