Future XServe seems pretty straightforward
It seems pretty obvious what the specs for future XServes will be. I think that it goes without saying that future XServes will have the same CPU and motherboards as the just announced G5's. This is good news for the XServe lineup!
I can't wait to see the benchmarks for a rack of XServe's running BLAST. I thought that the XServe was a great idea that was watered down with an inferior chip and bus. Soon the XServe will be a major force for number crunching in the low end server environment (assuming that Apple does not take four months to release such machines).
Of course, what seems obvious to me may not be obvious to everyone else. Comments?
I can't wait to see the benchmarks for a rack of XServe's running BLAST. I thought that the XServe was a great idea that was watered down with an inferior chip and bus. Soon the XServe will be a major force for number crunching in the low end server environment (assuming that Apple does not take four months to release such machines).
Of course, what seems obvious to me may not be obvious to everyone else. Comments?
Comments
Originally posted by Yevgeny
It seems pretty obvious what the specs for future XServes will be. I think that it goes without saying that future XServes will have the same CPU and motherboards as the just announced G5's. This is good news for the XServe lineup!
I can't wait to see the benchmarks for a rack of XServe's running BLAST. I thought that the XServe was a great idea that was watered down with an inferior chip and bus. Soon the XServe will be a major force for number crunching in the low end server environment (assuming that Apple does not take four months to release such machines).
Of course, what seems obvious to me may not be obvious to everyone else. Comments?
I still think a 4-way unit will crop up with 5 or 6 PCI-X slots to fill out the range, and to accompany I would also expect a 3 shelf RAID unit capable of supporting around 8TB.
Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist
I still think a 4-way unit will crop up with 5 or 6 PCI-X slots to fill out the range, and to accompany I would also expect a 3 shelf RAID unit capable of supporting around 8TB.
Mmmmmm... four way G5. That would be great, but I think that Apple would want to sell two dualies instead. Besides four 2GHz G5's would put off almost 400W of heat! Four way 1.6GHz chips could work better.
I think that this brings up an interesting issue, namely that Apple needs to better differentiate the XServe lineup. Right now, there isn't enough differentiation. It would be interesting to see a cheap XServe with Dual G4's, two midrange Dual G5 models, and a moster quad G5 (don't forget to bring your own AC!).
Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist
I still think a 4-way unit will crop up with 5 or 6 PCI-X slots to fill out the range, and to accompany I would also expect a 3 shelf RAID unit capable of supporting around 8TB.
Are you nuts?
Apple is already using 9 fans and a case designed around cooling for the desktop machine! 4 G5's in a single box would certainly cause a meltdown. If they revved up the fans a little bit, think about how much everyone would complain. Even though this is a server machine designed for a server environment, everyone's bitching about the noise.
Originally posted by Kernel Panic
Are you nuts?
Apple is already using 9 fans and a case designed around cooling for the desktop machine! 4 G5's in a single box would certainly cause a meltdown. If they revved up the fans a little bit, think about how much everyone would complain. Even though this is a server machine designed for a server environment, everyone's bitching about the noise.
9 fans but only what 4 for the processors? its different in the server environment because of how its setup...xserve raid would be suitable for it
"We don't comment on unannounced products."
That should be enough time to iron out any little niggles that come up with the G5 once they get out there to the computing public so they can have a rock solid server
Originally posted by Kernel Panic
Are you nuts?
Apple is already using 9 fans and a case designed around cooling for the desktop machine! 4 G5's in a single box would certainly cause a meltdown. If they revved up the fans a little bit, think about how much everyone would complain. Even though this is a server machine designed for a server environment, everyone's bitching about the noise.
Why would the sound matter in a server environment? Let them buzz like lawnmowers, they're in another room. Besides, other chips like Intel's and AMD still dissapate more heat than the 970.
Originally posted by Kernel Panic
Are you nuts?
Apple is already using 9 fans and a case designed around cooling for the desktop machine! 4 G5's in a single box would certainly cause a meltdown. If they revved up the fans a little bit, think about how much everyone would complain. Even though this is a server machine designed for a server environment, everyone's bitching about the noise.
No, I'm not nuts - I just understand corporate IT seeing as I've delivered major Win2K projects for the likes of BP.
If you want to see what's really needed to have a serious attempt at cracking the MIS department - and please don't hide under the old "why should Apple want that market argument, why do you think Sybase and Oracle are onboard? Just for fun? - go and have a look at IBM's x360 or x440.
Count the fans, count the power supplies, gasp in awe at the way two servers - already with more slots than an xServe - can share a single PCI-X expansion chassis with 12 slots.
Also, take time to analyse the elegant arrangement for lights-out administration, and the fact that if a component is recognised as faulty, a trail of LEDs guide you to the part in question.
Also ask yourself about how much cosier you'd feel if you also had redundant RAM slots.
Like I said, I'm not nuts I've possibly just seen some real IT setups and I wouldn't mind seeing Apple make a real attempt at getting back into that market.
Originally posted by chych
Why would the sound matter in a server environment? Let them buzz like lawnmowers, they're in another room. Besides, other chips like Intel's and AMD still dissapate more heat than the 970.
But are they in a 1U enclosure? Mostly not and if they are there isn't more than one proc(?). I think it'll be a real challenge to pack a couple of 970s into the current XServe enclosure and still ensure that it doesn't melt. I (generally) agree that noise isn't so much of a problem but even with a lot of really big fans it'll be hard to ensure airflow, enough storage and all the rest of it within 1U.
They'll try though and I'm sure it's coming. Once they have .09 procs maybe as they'll run cooler.
Originally posted by Kernel Panic
Are you nuts?
Apple is already using 9 fans and a case designed around cooling for the desktop machine! 4 G5's in a single box would certainly cause a meltdown. If they revved up the fans a little bit, think about how much everyone would complain. Even though this is a server machine designed for a server environment, everyone's bitching about the noise.
I went to an Apple seminar about the Xserve last year. They don't call the fan a "fan": they call it a blower. Quietness is not a key design priority with these machines.
I still think that Apple needs to differentiate the XServe more. They need a low end cheapo G4 config and two or three high end G5 configs.
Apple makes good hardware Eweek XServe Raid review and they should expand the XServe lineup. Obviously, they will reuse the current G5 Mobo for servers (no reason not to) and this is a great thing. It would also be a great thing if they took advantage of the fact that a quad G5 could sell in a server with higher margins to fund the R&D for a new Mobo that could be used in the true ultimate Pro machine. XServes need more variety.
The G5 is more of a server CPU than the G4 was ever meant to be. The G4 is a dog next to the G5. And servers want 64 bit so ... a G5 Xserver will happen. Sooner better than later.
Originally posted by Matsu
Agreed, it's in the DNA, it fits the task: you'll see an Xserve G5 before you see a PB G5, well before. Nice margins over there in rack-mount land. Apple likes margins. One thing to consider is that even a single G5 will pack more computational power into a 1U than Apple's dual G4. So what do they lose by using a G5? NOTHING. They gain speed, and 64 bit adress space.
Of course we will see a G5 XServe before a G5 powerbook. The G5 XServe mobo already exists (and it looks like a great server bandwidth mobo). if we don't have a G5 XServe announcement within two months, then something is very wrong.
Yeah, the margins in server land are definitely what Apple likes to have on their boxes. Unfortunately, the volume isn't as high as the volume in Pro land. the good news for Apple is that they get most all of the Server R&D paid for by making pro machines. This is a very happy coincidence for Apple.
Originally posted by Scott
I think it would be a mistake to differentiate the Xserve line. If you want more power you buy more Us so why do you need two different ones?
The G5 is more of a server CPU than the G4 was ever meant to be. The G4 is a dog next to the G5. And servers want 64 bit so ... a G5 Xserver will happen. Sooner better than later.
Because in some places you get charged on the basis of how large your server is.
Unfortunately, one size of XServe does not fit all of Apple's market. I think that they should go with a low end dual G4 for people who don't need computational speed, but want a server to manage data, and then go with two dual G5 configs. I'd also like to throw in a quad G5 config, but I know that this is pointless dreaming.
My bets are on Apple having Xserve G5 prototypes all set to go. They are just waiting for G5 production to ramp up, and for the Powermacs to hit the market so they can iron out any bugs.