Intel SR6850HW4 Server

Our server was not a simple demo system, but a complete Intel Server system solution: the SR6850HW4 server. It is an enormous 6U rack/pedestal server, also available in a slimmer 4U form as the SR4850HW4. The main difference is that the 4U server has 5 (6U:10) disk bays, a bit less cooling, and smaller and slightly less powerful power supplies.


Below you can see the massive heatsinks used to cool the Xeon 71xx down.


As the new quad socket Xeon 71xx CPU fits in a 4U server, we can easily compare it with one the most popular quad Opteron servers: the HP DL585.

HP ProLiant DL585 version 2006

The HP ProLiant DL585 available in the labs was not the recently introduced DL585G2 which features DDR2, the new AMD Opteron socket F and 2.5 inch SAS drives. It is a small evolution of the HP DL585 which we reviewed back in 2004. Back then, each of the four CPU boards had 8 memory slots and supported up to 16GB (8x2GB) of DDR-266, for total of 64GB RAM. The original HP was able to use up to 48GB of DDR-333.

The latest DL585 can use 4GB DIMMs, allowing it to access no less than 128GB of DDR266. It can also use 32GB of fast DDR-400 or 64GB of DDR-333, which is very impressive. Below you can find a schematic overview of the latest DL585 technology.


The Opteron keeps a few very important advantages over the Xeon MP, not the least of which is a very elegant platform design. The quad dual core configuration generates more cache coherency traffic, as the 8 cores of the Opteron have to keep 8 L2 caches coherent while the Xeon MP has to keep track of 4 L3 caches. However four 4GB/s full duplex point to point connections make this traffic flow very smoothly while each pair of Xeon MPs have to share a 6.4GB/s half-duplex bus. The Opterons also have a fast 4.8GB/s full duplex point-to-point connection to the I/O chips.

Supermicro SS6015b-8+ server

For the price of a 4U quad socket server you can get several dual socket 1U/2U servers. There are several reasons why you would still prefer to buy the more expensive 4U server: more disk bays, more RAS features, more full height expansion slots, and of course more performance. Depending on your needs one these factors might be the decisive one. In the case of the 4U servers reviewed here, direct attached storage will not be the deciding factor, as you can get 4 or 5 disk bays in a 1 or 2U server too. If performance is the critical factor, it is clear that we must include a 1U or 2U server to see how much more performance you gain if you choose the quad socket machine.

Enter the Supermicro SS6015B-8+, which is equipped with Supermicro's X7DBR-8+ dual Xeon "Bensley platform" server board, based on the Intel 5000P chipset. While it doesn't have the RAS features of the 4U machines (for example, it doesn't have redundant PSUs), it can compete on all other points. In terms of RAM capacity for example, the Supermicro motherboard has sixteen (!) 240-pin DIMM slots that can support up to 64GB of ECC DDR2-667/533 FB-DIMMs. You can also trade in some RAM capacity for RAS: the similar SS6015B-3RV features "only" 8 DIMM slots but two 650W PSUs. The SS6015-8+ is also equipped with a SCSI or SATA backplane that offers 4 drive bays.


Due to the 1U form factor, you have to sacrifice a bit of expandability. One 133 MHz PCI-X slot can support two different riser cards, but not simultaneously. You have to choose between the PCIe riser card and the PCI-X one.

We are well aware that this particular Supermicro server is not a direct competitor. However, a similar 2U server like the 6025B will give almost the same performance numbers. The 6025B Server offers 8 drive bays, redundant power supplies and 6 expansion slots. So we are basically using the SS6015b-8+ as a "performance reference". We will try to answer the question: when do four Xeon MP or Opterons make sense, and how does it compare to the best dual Xeon available, the Xeon DP 5160?

The Xeon 70xx Server CPUs overview
Comments Locked

88 Comments

View All Comments

  • Niv KA - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Those benchmarks will be presented in our Clovertown - Intel's new quad core server CPU - review.


    I belive Clovertown is going to be announced somethime in the next week or two. On thursday I went to the "Microsoft: Ready for a New Day" here in Belgium (where Bill gates made an appearance of about half an hour, although not related!) and at the Intel booth they were showing off 4 servers which where running an "unannounced platform"! One of the technical guys at the booth let me in on a little "secret"! The Supermicro Systems were running "two sockets each box, each socket 4 cores! Eight cores each box! And the best part is its woodcrest arch!". I asked him if it was clovertown and he sayed that he "is just a technical assistant, not alowed to say anything" but he made the answer clear on his face! Clovertown is ready to go, and its FAST! They were running benchmarks all the time! I will post pictures on the fourms if I have enough time, but I have a HUGE project I need to hand in by tuesday so I might forget!

    ---Niv K Aharonovich

    PS: About the "outdated" system comments above, I am fully on Anandtechs side, it is impossible for an online newspaper company to make enough money to BUY everything, esp. in the $15,000 area! The only way is to ask for it from the vendors, and the vendors decide what to provide! Good job anandtech and continue the good work!!!!!!!
  • Dennis Travis - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link

    Great job as usuall. Keep up the excellent work.
  • AnandThenMan - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    Another bullshit "comparison" nice job guys. You are comparing an AMD system that has been out for over 2 years. Useless review as usual. Why are you not comparing new with new? Why don't you use a Xeon box that was out 2 years ago?

    Anandtech's reviews have become more and more worthless.
  • JohanAnandtech - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link

    1. AMD has confirmed that they feel the HP DL585 with 4x 880 is a worthy competitor for our Tulsa machine.
    2. This server is 5 months old, not 2 years. As I made clear in the article, this is the 2006 revision.

    As we invest a lot of time of effort to convince OEMs and others to send us extremely expensive hardware for review, spend weeks tweaking benchmarks and OS to give you benchmarks, we hope we may expect some useful feedback from our readers.

    Just writing "useless" with little or no explanation why you feel it is worthless is not helping anyone.
  • AnandThenMan - Sunday, November 12, 2006 - link

    I was going to post an explanation as to why the "review" is very poorly done. But Scientia over at AMDz did a far better explanation then I could come up with.

    http://www.amdzone.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&...">http://www.amdzone.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&...

    Either the review is intentionally authored to show Intel in as best light as possible, or the author is incompetent and should not be doing reviews at all. I stand by what I originally posted, the review is bullshit.
  • primer - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link

    Agreed.
  • goldfish2 - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    Can I just quickly mention how nice it is to read an article where the author has managed to present all the relevant informatiom in as concise a manner as is possible, good job.
  • JohanAnandtech - Saturday, November 11, 2006 - link

    Thanks!

    Server reviews are extremely time consuming so most publications are not interested in it, so I am glad AT allows me to do this kind of reviews.

  • AllYourBaseAreBelong2Us - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    Can you guys get a new DL585 G2 and do benchmarks with this new model instead?
  • Viditor - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    I thought this too...the G2 has 7 PCIe slots (3 x8, 4 x4), is $800 less expensive, and offers newer SCSI controllers.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now