X-Gene 1, Atom C2000 and Xeon E3: Exploring the Scale-Out Server World
by Johan De Gelas on March 9, 2015 2:00 PM ESTSupermicro's MicroCloud SYS-5038ML-H8TRF
Supermicro's 3U MicroCloud chassis is not a competitor for "advanced" micro servers such as AMD's SeaMicro SM15000 or HP's Moonshot. Advanced micro servers save power and keep management costs low due to an integrated fabric that routes networking and storage traffic very fast inside the box and only needs to be attached to the core switch via a few cables outside. You could say that the rack switch has been upgraded and integrated.
The Supermicro MicroCloud is a lot simpler. Only the power and cooling is shared among the nodes; there is no sophisticated integrated network or storage backplane. The MicroCloud still needs a separate switch and storage is pretty straightforward: each node has access to two disks.
Basically the MicroCloud is just a bunch of server nodes that share two redundant power supplies and cooling (4x 8 cm fans). As a result, it is a dense and inexpensive way to bundle eight (up to 24 in some SKUs) low-end servers. It is clearly targeted at the HPC and hyperscale datacenter where people want a "blade-like" server chassis but do not want to pay for features they rarely/never would use (e.g. centralized remote management/KVM, integrated switching, and SAN technology).
We've heard from several resellers that this chassis has been very successful, not in the least for being simple and affordable. Each node has a dual gigabit Intel i350 gigabit controller and one Ethernet interface for remote management; a KVM connector is also available. If you need more networking speed, one PCIe x8 slot is available.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
47 Comments
View All Comments
JohanAnandtech - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Are you sure this is up to date? gcc tells me -march=native is not supported.JohanAnandtech - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Update. march=native does not work. I have tried -march=armv8-a but does not do much (it is probably the default). O3 makes the biggest difference. Omit it and you get 5.7 GB/s. With -O3, I am at 18 GB/s and more (stream m400)Alone-in-the-net - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Apologies. For AArch64 the only is "armv8-a", for intel, -march=native sets it to use the one for your CPU.https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.2/gcc/AArch...
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.2/gcc/i386-...
From version 4.9.x and above of GCC, you can really start to add tuning for the CPU.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.2/gcc/AArch...
-mtune=name
Specify the name of the target processor for which GCC should tune the performance of the code. Permissible values for this option are: ‘generic’, ‘cortex-a53’, ‘cortex-a57’.
Additionally, this option can specify that GCC should tune the performance of the code for a big.LITTLE system. The only permissible value is ‘cortex-a57.cortex-a53’.
Where none of -mtune=, -mcpu= or -march= are specified, the code will be tuned to perform well across a range of target processors.
Alone-in-the-net - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Also support for the XGene1 as a compilation target is only from GCC5.https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/changes.html
Support has been added for the following processors (GCC identifiers in parentheses): ARM Cortex-A72 (cortex-a72) and initial support for its big.LITTLE combination with the ARM Cortex-A53 (cortex-a72.cortex-a53), Cavium ThunderX (thunderx), Applied Micro X-Gene 1 (xgene1). The GCC identifiers can be used as arguments to the -mcpu or -mtune options, for example: -mcpu=xgene1
The_Assimilator - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
So AMD, how's that bet on ARM you made looking now?extide - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Don't count them out yet. I really wish that intel didn't abandon ARM for the Atom, I bet they could come out with a sweet armv8 core if they had to, and on their process it would be sweet.BlueBlazer - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
That AMD Opteron A1100 looking more like abandonware as more time passes on, and that was like 8 months ago. Until now not a single real world deployment nor was used in any of AMD's own SeaMicro servers. Currently available as development kit with a rather steep price tag.tuxRoller - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
You REALLY should be using GCC 5. that includes many improvements for the armv8 isa. I'd suggest grabbing a nightly of Fedora 22, but Ubuntu 15.04 may be using gcc5 as well.Wilco1 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Agreed, nobody doing anything on AArch64 should contemplate using GCC4.8. Even 4.9 is way out of date. GCC5.0 with latest GLIBC gives major speedups across the board.JohanAnandtech - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
"Way out of date?" We tried out 4.9.2, which has been released on October 30th 2014. That is about 4 months old. https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html. Latest version is 4.8.4, 5.0 has not even been released AFAIK.