Quick Take: Nehalem/Istanbul Comparison at AnandTech

Johan De Gelas and crew present an interesting comparison of Dunnington, Shanghai, Istanbul and Nehalem in a new post at AnandTech this week. In the test line-up are the "top bin" parts from Intel and AMD in 4-core and 6-core incarnations:

• Intel Nehalem-EP Xeon, X5570 2.93GHz, 4-core, 8-thread


• Intel "Dunnington" Xeon, X7460, 2.66GHz, 6-core, 6-thread


• AMD "Shanghai" Opteron 2389/8389, 2.9GHz, 4-core, 4-thread


• AMD "Istanbul" Opteron 2435/8435, 2.6GHz, 6-core, 6-thread

Most importantly for virtualization systems architects is how the vCPU scheduling affects "measured" performance. The telling piece comes from the difference in comparison results where vCPU scheduling is equalized:

[caption id="attachment_1276" align="aligncenter" width="450" caption="AnandTech's Quad Sockets v. Dual Sockets Comparison. Oct 6, 2009."][/caption]

When comparing the results, De Gelas hits on the I/O factor which chiefly separates VMmark from vAPUS:

The result is that VMmark with its huge number of VMs per server (up to 102 VMs!) places a lot of stress on the I/O systems. The reason for the Intel Xeon X5570's crushing VMmark results cannot be explained by the processor architecture alone. One possible explanation may be that the VMDq (multiple queues and offloading of the virtual switch to the hardware) implementation of the Intel NICs is better than the Broadcom NICs that are typically found in the AMD based servers.

Johan De Gelas, AnandTech, Oct 2009

This is yet another issue that VMware architects struggle with in complex deployments. The latency in "Dunnington" is a huge contributor to its downfall and why the Penryn architecture was a dead-end. Combined with 8 additional threads in the 2P form factor, Nehalem delivers twice the number of hardware execution contexts than Shanghai, resulting in significant efficiencies for Nehalem where small working data sets are involved.

When larger sets are used - as in vAPUS - the Istanbul's additional cores allows it to close the gap to within the clock speed difference of Nehalem (about 12%). In contrast to VMmark which implies a 3:2 advantage to Nehalem, the vAPUS results suggest a closer performance gap in more aggressive virtualization use cases.

SOLORI's Take: We differ with De Gelas on the reduction in vAPUS' data set to accommodate the "cheaper" memory build of the Nehalem system. While this offers some advantages in testing, it also diminishes one of Opteron's greatest strengths: access to cheap and abundant memory. Here we have the testing conundrum: fit the test around the competitors or the competitors around the test. The former approach presents a bias on the "pure performance" aspect of the competitors, while the latter is more typical of use-case testing.

We do not construe this issue as intentional bias on AnandTech's part, however it is another vector to consider in the evaluation of the results. De Gelas delivers a report worth reading in its entirety, and we view this as a primer to the issues that will define the first half of 2010.

Quick Take: Magny-Cours Spotted, Pushed to 3GHz for wPrime

Andreas Galistel at NordicHardware posted an article showing a system running a pair of engineering samples of the Magny-Cours processor running at 3.0GHz. Undoubtedly these images were culled from a report "leaked" on XtremeSystems forums showing a "DINAR2" motherboard with SR5690 chipset - in single and dual processor installation - running Magny-Cours at the more typical pre-release speed of 1.7GHz.

We know that Magny-Cours is essentially a MCM of Istanbul delivered in the rectangular socket G34 package. One thing illuminating about the two posts is the reported "reduction" in L3 cache from 12MB (6MB x 2 in MCM) to 10MB (2 x 5MB in MCM). Where did the additional cache go? That 's easy: since a 2P Magny-Cours installation is essentially a 4P Istanbul configuration, these processors have the new HT Assist feature enabled - giving 1MB of cache from each chip in the MCM to HT Assist.

"wPrime uses a recursive call of Newton's method for estimating functions, with f(x)=x²-k, where k is the number we're sqrting, until Sgn(f(x)/f'(x)) does not equal that of the previous iteration, starting with an estimation of k/2. It then uses an iterative calling of the estimation method a set amount of times to increase the accuracy of the results. It then confirms that n(k)²=k to ensure the calculation was correct. It repeats this for all numbers from 1 to the requested maximum."

- wPrime site

Another thing intriguing about the XtremeSystems post in particular is the reported wPrime 32M and 1024M completion times. Compared to the hyper-threading-enabled 2P Xeon W5590 (130W TDP) running wPrime 32M at 3.33GHz (3.6GHz turbo)  in 3.950 seconds, the 2P 3.0GHz Magny-Cours completed wPrime 32M in an unofficial 3.539 seconds - about 10% quicker while running a 10% slower clock. From the myopic lens of this result, it would appear AMD's choice of "real cores" versus hyper-threading delivers its punch.

SOLORI's Take: As a "reality check" we can compared the reigning quad-socked, quad-core Opteron 8393 SE result in wPrime 32M and wPrime 1024M at 3.90 and 89.52  seconds, respectively. Adjusted for clock and core count versus its Shanghai cousin, the Magny-Cours engineering samples - at 3.54 and 75.77 seconds, respectively - turned-in times about 10% slower than our calculus predicted. While still "record breaking" for 2P systems, we expected the Magny-Cours/Istanbul cores to out-perform Shanghai clock-per-clock - even at this stage of the game.

Due to the multi-threaded nature of the wPrime benchmark, it is likely that the HT Assist feature - enabled in a 2P Magny-Cours system by default - is the cause of the discrepancy. By reducing the available L3 cache by 1MB per die - 4MB of L3 cache total - HT Assist actually could be creating a slow-down. However, there are several things to remember here:

• These are engineering samples qualified for 1.7GHz operation


• Speed enhancements were performed with tools not yet adapted to Magny-Cours


• The author indicated a lack of control over AMD's Cool 'n Quiet technology which could have made "as tested" core clocks somewhat lower than what CPUz reported (at least during the extended tests)


• It is speculated that AMD will release Magny-Cours at 2.2GHz (top bin) upon release, making the 2.6+ GHz results non-typical


• The BIOS and related dependencies are likely still being "baked"

Looking at the more "typical" engineering sample speed tests posted on the XtremeSystems' forum tracks with the 3.0GHz overclock results at a more "typical" clock speed of 2.6GHz for 2P Magny-Cours: 3.947 seconds and 79.625 seconds for wPrime 32M and 1024M, respectively. Even at that speed, the 24-core system is on par with the 2P Nehalem system clocked nearly a GHz faster. Oddly, Intel reports the W5590  as not supporting "turbo" or hyper-threading although it is clear that Intel's marketing is incorrect based on actual testing.

Assuming Magny-Cours improves slightly on its way to market, we already know how 24-core Istanbul stacks-up against 16-thread Nehalem in VMmark and what that means for Nehalem-EP. This partly explains the marketing shift as Intel tries to position Nehalep-EP as a destined for workstations instead of servers. Whether or not you consider this move a prelude to the ensuing Nehalem-EX v. Magny-Cours combat to come or an attempt to keep Intel's server chip power average down by eliminating the 130W+ parts from the "server" list,  Intel and AMD will each attempt win the war before the first shot is fired. Either way, we see nothing that disrupts the price-performance and power-performance comparison models that dominate the server markets.

[Ed: The 10% difference is likely due to the fact that the author was unable to get "more than one core" clocked at 3.0GHz. Likewise, he was uncertain that all cores were reliably clocking at 2.6GHz for the longer wPrime tests. Again, this engineering sample was designed to run at 1.7GHz and was not likely "hand picked" to run at much higher clocks. He speculated that some form of dynamic core clocking linked to temperature was affecting clock stability - perhaps due to some AMD-P tweaks in Magny-Cours.]

Quick Take: Dell/Nehalem Take #2, 2P VMmark Spot

The new 1st runner-up spot for VMmark in the “8 core” category was taken yesterday by Dell's R710 - just edging-out the previous second spot HP ProLiant BL490 G6 by 0.1% - a virtual dead heat. Equipped with a pair of Xeon X5570 ($1386/ea, bulk list) and 96GB registered DDR3/1066 (12x8GB), the 2U, rack mount R710 weighs-in with a tile ratio of 1.43 over 102 VMs. :

• Dell R710 w/redundant high-output power supply, ($18,209)


• 2 x Intel Xeon X5570 Processors (included)


• 96GB ECC DDR3/1066 (12×8GB) (included)


• 2 x Broadcom NexXtreme II 5709 dual-port GigabitEthernet w/TOE (included)


• 1 x Intel PRO 1000VT quad-port GigabitEthernet (1x PCIe-x4 slot, $529)


• 3 x QLogic QLE2462 FC HBA (1x PCIe slot, $1,219/ea)


• 1 x LSI1078 SAS Controller (on-board)


• 8 x 15K SAS OS drive, RAID10 (included)


• Required ProSupport package ($2,164)


• Total as Configured: $24,559 ($241/VM, not including storage)

Three Dell/EMC CX3-40f arrays were used as the storage backing of the test. The storage system included 8GB cache, 2 enclosures and 15, 15K disks per array delivering 19 LUNs at about 300GB each. Intel's Hyper-Threading and  "Turbo Boost" were enabled for 8-thread, 3.33GHz core clocking as was VT; however embedded SATA and USB were disabled as is common practice.

At about $1,445/tile ($241/VM) the new “second dog” delivers its best at a 20% price premium over Lenovo's "top dog" - although the non-standard OS drive configuration makes-up a half of the difference, with Dell's mandatory support package making-up the remainder. Using a simple RAID1 SAS and eliminating the support package would have droped the cost to $20,421 - a dead heat with Lenovo at $182/VM.

Comparing the Dell R710 the 2P, 12-core benchmark HP DL385 G6 Istanbul system at 15.54@11 tiles:

• HP DL385 G6  ($5,840)


• 2 x AMD 2435 Istanbul Processors (included)


• 64GB ECC DDR2/667 (8×8GB) ($433/DIMM)


• 2 x Broadcom 5709 dual-port GigabitEthernet (on-board)


• 1 x Intel 82571EB dual-port GigabitEthernet (1x PCIe slot, $150/ea)


• 1 x QLogic QLE2462 FC HBA (1x PCIe slot, $1,219/ea)


• 1 x HP SAS Controller (on-board)


• 2 x SAS OS drive (included)


• $10,673/system total (versus $14,696 complete from HP)

Direct pricing shows Istanbul’s numbers at $1,336/tile ($223/VM) which is  a 7.5% savings per-VM over the Dell R710. Going to the street - for memory only - changes the Istanbul picture to $970/tile ($162/VM) representing a 33% savings over the R710.

SOLORI's Take: Istanbul continues to offer a 20-30% CAPEX value proposition against Nehalem in the virtualization use case - even without IOMMU and higher memory bandwidth promised in upcoming Magny-Cours. With the HE parts running around $500 per processor, the OPEX benefits are there for Istanbul too. It is difficult to understand why HP wants to charge $900/DIMM for 8GB PC-5300 sticks when they are available on the street for 50% less - that's a 100% markup. Looking at what HP charges for 8GB DDR3/1066 - $1,700/DIM - they are at least consistent. HP's memory pricing practice makes one thing clear - customers are not buying large memory configurations from their system vendors...

On the contrary, Dell appears to be happy to offer decent prices on 8GB DDR3/1066 with their R710 at approximately $837/DIMM - almost par with street prices.  Looking to see if this parity held up with Dell's AMD offerings, we examined the prices offered with Dell's R805: while - at $680/DIMM - Dell's prices were significantly better than HP's, they still exceeded the market by 50%. Still, we were able to configure a Dell R805 with AMD 2435's for much less than the equivalent HP system:

• Dell R805 w/redundant power ($7,214)


• 2 x AMD 2435 Istanbul Processors (included)


• 64GB ECC DDR2/667 (8×8GB) ($433/ea, street)


• 4 x Broadcom 5708 GigabitEthernet (on-board)


• 1 x Intel PRO 100oPT dual-port GigabitEthernet (1x PCIe slot, included)


• 1 x QLogic QLE2462 FC HBA (1x PCIe slot, included)


• 1 x Dell PERC SAS Controller (on-board)


• 2 x SAS OS drive (included)


• $10,678/system total (versus $12,702 complete from Dell)

This offering from Dell should be able to deliver equivalent performance with HP's DL385 G6 and likewise savings/VM compared to the Nehalem-based R710. Even at the $12,702 price as delivered from Dell, the R805 represents a potential $192/VM price point - about $50/VM (25%) savings over the R710.

Quick Take: HP's Sets Another 48-core VMmark Milestone

Not satisfied with a landmark VMmark score that crossed the 30 tile mark for the first time, HP's performance team went back to the benches two weeks later and took another swing at the performance crown. Well, the effort paid off, and HP significantly out-paced their two-week-old record with a score of 53.73@35 tiles in the heavy weight, 48-core category.

Using the same 8-processor HP ProLiant DL785 G6 platform as in the previous run - complete with 2.8GHz AMD Opteron 8439 SE 6-core chips and 256GB DDR2/667 - the new score comes with significant performance bumps in the javaserver, mailserver and database results achieved by the same system configuration as the previous attempt - including the same ESX 4.0 version (164009). So what changed to add an additional 5 tiles to the team's run? It would appear that someone was unsatisfied with the storage configuration on the mailserver run.

Given that the tile ratio of the previous run ran about 6% higher than its 24-core counterpart, there may have been a small indication that untapped capacity was available. According to the run notes, the only reported changes to the test configuration - aside from the addition of the 5 LUNs and 5 clients needed to support the 5 additional tiles - was a notation indicating that the "data drive and backup drive for all mailserver VMs" we repartitioned using AutoPart v1.6.

The change in performance numbers effectively reduces the virtualization cost of the system by 15% to about $257/VM - closing-in on its 24-core sibling to within $10/VM and stretching-out its lead over "Dunnington" rivals to about $85/VM. While virtualization is not the primary application for 8P systems, this demonstrates that 48-core virtualization is definitely viable.

SOLORI's Take: HP's performance team has done a great job tuning its flagship AMD platform, demonstrating that platform performance is not just related to hertz or core-count but requires balanced tuning and performance all around. This improvement in system tuning demonstrates an 18% increase in incremental scalability - approaching within 3% of the 12-core to 24-core scaling factor, making it actually a viable consideration in the virtualization use case.

In recent discussions with AMD about the SR5690 chipset applications for Socket-F, AMD re-iterated that the mainstream focus for SR5690 has been Magny-Cours and the Q1/2010 launch. Given the close relationship between Istanbul and Magny-Cours - detailed nicely by Charlie Demerjian at Semi-Accurate - the bar is clearly fixed for 2P and 4P virtualization systems designed around these chips. Extrapolating from the similarities and improvements to I/O and memory bandwidth, we expect to  see 2P VMmarks besting 32@23 and 4P scores over 54@39 from HP, AMD and Magny-Cours.

SOLORI's 2nd Take: Intel has been plugging away with its Nehalem-EX for 8-way systems and - delivering 128-threads - promises to deliver some insane VMmarks. Assuming Intel's EX scales as efficiently as AMD's new Opterons have, extrapolations indicate performance for the 4P, 64-thread Nehalem-EX shoud fall between 41@29 and 44@31 given the current crop of speed and performance bins. Using the same methods, our calculus predicts an 8P, 128-thread EX system should deliver scores between 64@45 and 74@52.

With EX expected to clock at 2.66GHz with 140W TDP and AMD's MCM-based Magny-Cours doing well to hit 130W ACP in the same speed bins, CIO's balancing power and performance considerations will need to break-out the spreadsheets to determine the winners here. With both systems running 4-channel DDR3, there will be no power or price advantage given on either side to memory differences: relative price-performance and power consumption of the CPU's will be major factors. Assuming our extrapolations are correct, we're looking at a slight edge to AMD in performance-per-watt in the 2P segment, and a significant advantage in the 4P segment.

Quick Take: HP Plants the Flag with 48-core VMmark Milestones

Following on the heels of last month we predicted that HP could easily claim the VMmark summit with its DL785 G6 using AMD's Istanbul processors:

If AMD’s Istanbul scales to 8-socket at least as efficiently as Dunnington, we should be seeing some 48-core results in the 43.8@30 tile range in the next month or so from HP’s 785 G6 with 8-AMD 8439 SE processors. You might ask: what virtualization applications scale to 48-cores when $/VM is doubled at the same time? We don’t have that answer, and judging by Intel and AMD’s scale-by-hub designs coming in 2010, that market will need to be created at the OEM level.

Well, HP didn't make us wait too long. Today, the PC maker cleared two significant VMmark milestones: crossing the 30 tile barrier in a single system (180 VMs) and exceeding the 40 mark on VMmark score. With a score of 47.77@30 tiles, the HP DL785 G6 - powered by 8 AMD Istanbul 8439 SE processors and 256GB of DDR2/667 memory - set the bar well beyond the competition and does so with better performance than we expected - most likely due to AMD's "HT assist" technology increasing its scalability.

Not available until September 14, 2009, the HP DL785 G6 is a pricey competitor. We estimate - based on today's processor and memory prices - that a system as well appointed as the VMmark-configured version (additional NICs, HBA, etc) will run at least $54,000 or around $300/VM (about $60/VM higher than the 24-core contender and about $35/VM lower than HP's Dunnnigton "equivalent").

SOLORI's Take: While the September timing of the release might imply a G6 with AMD's SR5690 and IOMMU, we're doubtful that the timing is anything but a coincidence: even though such a pairing would enable PCIe 2.0 and highly effective 10Gbps solutions. The modular design of the DL785 series - with its ability to scale from 4P to 8P in the same system - mitigates the economic realities of the dwindling 8P segment, and HP has delivered the pinnacle of performance for this technology.

We are also impressed with HP's performance team and their ability to scale Shanghai to Istanbul with relative efficiency. Moving from DL785 G5 quad-core to DL785 G6 six-core was an almost perfect linear increase in capacity (95% of theoretical increase from 32-core to 48-core) while performance-per-tile increased by 6%. This further demonstrates the "home run" AMD has hit with Istanbul and underscores the excellent value proposition of Socket-F systems over the last several years.

Unfortunately, while they demonstrate a 91% scaling efficiency from 12-core to 24-core, HP and Istanbul have only achieved a 75% incremental scaling efficiency from 24-cores to 48-cores. When looking at tile-per-core scaling using the 8-core, 2P system as a baseline (1:1 tile-to-core ratio), 2P, 4P and 8P Istanbul deliver 91%, 83% and 62.5% efficiencies overall, respectively. However, compared to the %58 and 50% tile-to-core efficiencies of Dunnington 4P and 8P, respectively, Istanbul clearly dominates the 4P and 8P performance and price-performance landscape in 2009.

In today's age of virtualization-driven scale-out, SOLORI's calculus indicates that multi-socket solutions that deliver a tile-to-core ratio of less than 75% will not succeed (economically) in the virtualization use case in 2010, regardless of socket count. That said - even at a 2:3 tile-to-core ratio - the 8P, 48-core Istanbul will likely reign supreme as the VMmark heavy-weight champion of 2009.

SOLORI's 2nd Take: HP and AMD's achievements with this Istanbul system should be recognized before we usher-in the next wave of technology like Magny-Cours and Socket G34. While the DL785 G6 is not a game changer, its footnote in computing history may well be as a preview of what we can expect to see out of Magny-Cours in 2H/2010. If 12-core, 4P system price shrinks with the socket count we could be looking at a $150/VM price-point for a 4P system: now that would be a serious game changer.

Quick Take: 6-core "Gulftown" Nehalem-EP Spotted, Tested

TechReport is reporting on a Taiwanese overclocker who may be testing a pair of Nehalem 6-core processors (2P) slated for release early in 2010. Likewise, AlienBabelTech mentions a Chinese website, HKEPC, that has preliminary testing completed on the desktop (1P) variant of the 6-core. While these could be different 32nm silicon parts, it is more likely - judging from the CPU-Z outputs and provided package pictures - that these are the same sample SKUs tested as 1P and 2P LGA-1366 components.

What does this mean for AMD and the only 6-core shipping today? Since Intel's still projecting Q2/2010 for the server part, AMD has a decent opportunity to grow market share for Istanbul. Intel's biggest rival will be itself - facing a wildly growing number of SKU's in across its i-line from i5, i7, i8 and i9 "families" with multiple speed and feature variants. Clearly, the non-HT version would stand as a direct competitor to Istanbul's native 6-core SKUs. Likewise, Istanbul may be no match for the 6-core Nehalem with HT and "turbo core" feature set.

However, with an 8-core "Beckton" Nehalem variant on the horizon, it might be hard to understand just where the Gulftown fits in Intel's picture. Intel faces a serious production issue, filling fab capacity with 4-core, 6-core and 8-core processors, each with speed, power, socket and HT variants from which to supply high-speed, high-power SKUs and lower-speed, low-power SKUs for 1P, 2P and 4P+ destinations. Doing the simple math with 3 SKU's per part Intel would be offering the market a minimum of 18 base parts according to their current marketing strategy: 9 with HT/turbo, 9 without HT/turbo. For socket LGA-1366, this could easily mean 40+ SKUs with 1xQPI and 2xQPI variants included (up from 23).

SOLORI's take: Intel will have to create some interesting "crippling or pricing tricks" to keep Gulftown from canibalizing the Gainstown market. If they follow their "normal" play book, we prodict the next 10-months will play out like this:

1. Initially there will be no 8-core product for 1P and 2P systems (LGA-1366), allowing for artificially high margins on the 8-core EX chip (LGA-1567), slowing the enevitable canibalization of the 4-core/2P market, and easing production burdens;


2. Intel will silently and abruptly kill Itanium in favor of "hyper-scale" Nehalem-EX variants;


3. Gulftown will remain high-power (90-130W TDP) and be positioned against AMD's G34 systems and Magny-Cours - plotting 12-core against 12-thread;


4. Intel creates a "socket refresh" (LGA-1566?) to enable "inexpensive" 2P-4P platforms from its Gulftown/Beckton line-up in 2H/2010 (ostensibly to maintain parity with G34) without hurting EX;


5. Revised, lower-power variants of Gainstown will be positioned against AMD's C32 target market;


6. Intel will cut SKUs in favor of higher margins, increasing speed and features for "same dollar" cost;


7. Non-HT parts will begin to disappear in 4-core configurations completely;


8. Intel's AES enhancements in Gulftown will allow it to further differentiate itself in storage and security markets;

It would be a mistake for Intel to continue growing SKU count or provide too much overlap between 4-core HT and 6-core non-HT offerings. If purchasing trends soften in 4Q/09 and remain (relatively) flat through 2Q/10, Intel will benefit from a leaner, well differentiated line-up. AMD has already announced a "leaner" plan for G34/C32. If all goes well at the fabs, 1H/2010 will be a good ole fashioned street fight between blue and green.

NEC Adds Top 48-Core, Dell Challenges 24-Core in VMmark Race

NEC's venerable Express5800/A1160 tops the 48-core VMmark category today with a score of 34.05@24 tiles to wrest the title away from IBM who established the category back in June, 2009. NEC's new "Dunnington" X7460 Xeon-based score represents a performance per tile ratio of 1.41 and a tile to core efficiency of 50% using 128GB of ECC DDR2 RAM.

Compared to the leading 24-core "Dunnington" results - held by IBM's x3850 M2 at 20.41@14 tiles - the NEC benchmark sets a scalability factor of 85.7% when moving from 4-socket to 8-socket systems. Both servers from NEC and IBM are scalable systems allowing for multiple chassis to be interconnected to achieve greater CPU-per-system numbers - each scaling in 4-CPU increments - ostensibly for OLTP advantages. The NEC starts at around $70K for 128GB and 48-cores resulting in a $486/VM cost to VMmark.

Also released today, Dell's PowerEdge R905 - with 24 2.8GHz Istanbul cores (8439 SE) and 128GB of ECC DDR2 RAM - secures the number two slot in the 24-category with a posting of 29.51@20 tiles. This represents a tile ratio of 1.475 and tile efficiency of 83.3% for the $29K rack server from Dell at about $240/VM. Compared to its 12-core counterpart, this represents a 91% scalability factor.

If AMD's Istanbul scales to 8-socket at least as efficiently as Dunnington, we should be seeing some 48-core results in the 43.8@30 tile range in the next month or so from HP's 785 G6 with 8-AMD 8439 SE processors. You might ask: what virtualization applications scale to 48-cores when $/VM is doubled at the same time? We don't have that answer, and judging by Intel and AMD's scale-by-hub designs coming in 2010, that market will need to be created at the OEM level.

Based on the performance we're seeing in 8-socket systems relative to 4-socket and the upcoming "massively mult-core" processors in 2010, the law of diminishing returns seems to favor the 4-socket system as the limit for anything but massive OLTP workloads. Even then, we expect to see 48-core in a "4-way" box more efficient than the same number of cores in an 8-way box. The choice in virtualization will continue to be workload biased, with 2P systems offering the best "small footprint" $/VM solution and 4P systems offering the best "large footprint" $/VM solution.

RIP Dunnington: HP's 4P/24-core Istanbul Takes VMmark Summit

HP has simultaneously achieved two near identical VMmark scores with their ProLiant DL585 G6 rack server and ProLiant BL685c G6 blade, claiming the summit from the reigning 24-core champion. Since first establishing the 24-core tier VMmark in September 2009, the Intel "Dunnington" 6-core processor (FSB architecture) has gone unchallenged. Now, with the release of the Opteron 8439SE raising the performance bar and the Opteron 8435 making a clear price-performance case, Dunnington's vacation is over.

Today's Istanbul-based achievements - established in the same memory footprint as the top Dunnington - renders the venerable processor all but obsolete, besting the champ by 4 tiles (24 more virtual machines) with a score-tile ratio of 1.5 for the rack system and 1.46 (same as the Dunnington at 14 tiles) for the blade. Using the HP and IBM on-line configuration tools, we established the retail (on-line) price for each system - down to the Fiber Channel HBA's - and compared them for $/VM value. Here are the results:

	HP DL685 G6	HP BL685c G6	IBM x3850 M2
Processor	4x Opteron 8439SE 2.8GHz	4x Opteron 8435 2.6GHz	4x Xeon X7460 2.67GHz
Memory	128GB (16x8GB PC2-5300 Reg ECC)	128GB (16x8GB PC2-5300 Reg ECC)	128GB (32x4GB PC2-5300 Reg ECC)
LAN Controllers	1x Dual-Port NC371i 1Gbps, 3x Dual-Port NC380T 1Gbps	2x Dual-Port NC532i Flex-10 10Gbs, 1x Dual-Port NC360m 1Gbps	2x Intel PRO 1000PT Dual-Port 1Gbps
HBA	Qlogic QMH2462 Dual-Port FC	Qlogic QMH2462 Dual-Port FC	2x Qlogic QMH2462 Dual-Port FC
OS RAID Controller	HP Smart Array P800	HP Smart Array P400i	HBA
OS Disks	2x 73Gb SAS 10K	2x 73Gb SAS 10K	SAN
On-line Price	$36,862.00	$35,296.00	$34,269.00
On-line w/3rd Party Memory	$28,712.00	$27,356.00	$33,207.00
VMmark Results	29.95@20 tiles	29.19@20 tiles	20.5@14 tiles
VMmark Tile Ratio	1.5	1.46	1.46
Cost/VM Retail	$307.18	$294.13	$407.96
Cost/VM 3rd Party	$239.27	$227.97	$276.73

The results indicate a 21-38% savings per-VM for Istanbul over Dunnington in the 4P/24-core virtualization space. This is bread-and-butter territory for VDI implementations and SQL virtualizations, and Intel's last remaining market place for the Dunnington processor. With the top-bin Istanbul weighing-in with 3% better performance, 18% less power consumption and 30% more capacity against Dunnington at the same price point, Intel's 4P gambit is played-out and Nehalem-EX cannot arrive too soon for Intel.

It is worth asking the question: does the HP ProLiant 4P/24-core offer the best value? The answer depends on the value proposition. From a straight $/VM vantage point, the HP DL385 G6 comparison demonstrated a more economical $182/VM - a difference of $40/VM lower than the BL685c G6 - so the 2P rack system still comes out on top for the absolute bottom-line concious. However, for applications like SQL consolidations, the additional savings in licensing on 4P platforms versus 2P platforms dwarfs this differential.

What is clear: AMD's Istanbul solution will remain unchallenged in the 4P space both in raw performance and in price-performance until Nehalem-EX is delivered. That means if Nehalem-EX does not arrive in Q3/2009, the market will likely wait for Q1/2010 to make any long-term purchasing decisions in anticipation of the new platforms slated to break-in the new year.

Quick Take: AMD Releases SE/HE Six-Cores

Today AMD published pricing for 5 new Istanbul SKUs - two designated as 105W APC high-performance SE and three as 55W APC low-power HE models.

In the SE category, the 2439SE and 8439SE at 2.8GHz replace the top-bin 2435/8435 Istanbul which occupies the 2.6GHz, 75W APC bin. Besides the clock frequency changes, maximum CPU temp is reduced from 76C to 71C. As with all other Istanbul's so far, these are HT3 bus parts running at 4.8GT/s. Price per socket has been announced at $1,019 and $2,649 for the 2439SE and 8439SE, respectively.

While the new SE parts do little to help the Opteron surpass the X5560 in raw performance, they fit well into the price-performance picture for AMD so long as street prices for the X5560 continue to hover in the $1,200-1,300 range.

[caption id="attachment_783" align="aligncenter" width="450" caption="SPECint_rate2006 - AMD Istanbul SE SKU's"][/caption]

In the HE category, the 2425HE/8425HE and 2423HE are new clock speed bins running at 2.1GHz and 2.0GHz, respectively. These parts maintain the same 76C maximum CPU temp as the normal 75W ACP parts, but are selected to consume just 55W ACP. Again, these SKU's also carry the 4.8GT/s HT3 bus of their Istanbul brethren. Pricing per socket has been announced at $523 and $1,514 for the 2425HE and 8425HE, respectively, with the 2423 HE targeted at $455 each.

[caption id="attachment_785" align="aligncenter" width="450" caption="SPECint_rate2006 - AMD Istanbul HE SKU's"][/caption]

Here, AMD's lower power target and pricing help the chip maker do some profit-taking as the price-performance of the HE parts appear to offer a measurable advantage over the L5506 (60W TDP) which is circling the $475 region (street price). See AMD's official press release about High Energy Efficiency and the Processing Power of Six-Cores for more details.

SOLORI's Take: AMD has expanded the Istanbul line with both high-performance and low-power SKU's as promised. With DDR3 prices inching downward, AMD's price-performance position is eroding slowly as Q3/2009 approaches. However, the 2-to-1 price penalty for top-bin Xeon/Nehalem platforms will take a lot more time to overcome, leaving the AMD the solid choice for budget conscious virtualization.

What's perhaps more exciting for AMD followers - especially in the good-enough performance market - is sitting in the HE bin. The HE shows weakness in the 2P space, however, against the 2.26GHz L5520 part from Intel which sports 8 thread per CPU and can burst core speeds in excess of 3GHz with its "turbo" feature. This places the 2P 2425 HE somewhere in-between L5506 and L5520 in performance-per-watt, with 2425 HE maintaining a reasonable price-performance advantage.

In the unchallenged 4P space, the 8425 HE, at 2.1GHz and $1,580 (est. street price) offers nearly 3:2 power savings over the standard part offering 24-cores at a little over 200W ACP (4P configurations). This savings will help scale-out clouds both private and public.

[gallery link="file" columns="2"]

(Note: SPEC CPU results gathered from published tables at http://spec.org.)

Updated 7/15/2009:  Added link to AMD's press release.

Tyan S8212 Spotted

[caption id="" align="alignright" width="210" caption="Tyan S8212 Istanbul SR5690+SP5100 Motherboard"][/caption]

Thanks to a tweet from @ErikBussink and the quick thinking of Charlie Demerjian at SemiAccurate we've been treated to a picture of the upcoming Tyan S8212 (2-way) based on AMD's new line-up of motherboard chip sets. While we see a x16 and 3 x8 PCIe slots, 6 SATA and 8 SAS ports, there is (conspicuously) no 10GE LOM - just 1GE.

What this board does deliver is HT3.0 and IOMMU support for Opteron/Istanbul and that's a good thing for virtualization. We know from earlier discussions with AMD that Istanbul needs the SR5890 SR5690 to unlock its hidden potential. Two internal USB ports cry-out for flash booting options...

ExtremeTech: Shanghai to Istanbul

ExtremeTech runs some tests on the AMD Istanbul 6-core processor and compares the 2435 (2.6GHz) part to the 2384 (2.7GHz) part in a drop-in replacement using PassMark and Spec_JBB2005. Testing was performed in the same Supermicro system running an updated (AGESA 3.5.0.0) BIOS supporting Istanbul processors.

"Perhaps, the most tell tale result comes from the BOPS rating scored using SpecJBB2005, which simulates a server's ability to process JAVA code. Here, there was a 20% increase in performance, with BOPS increasing from 380721 to 471440. That 20% performance boost would [definitely] be noticed on a busy server in a data center."

- Loyd Case, ExtremeTech.com

While not as thorough as Scott Wassman's drop-in testing at TechReport (reported earlier this month), ExtremeTech's results and conclusions were about the same: Istanbul makes a great upgrade processor.

"It all comes down to simple math, where one has to consider the cost of the CPUs and the time needed to perform an upgrade to see if the return on investment is worthwhile. Most will find that in this case, it is..."

- Lloyd Case, ExtremeTech

"And if you have existing, compatible Socket F servers, the Istanbul Opterons should be an excellent drop-in upgrade. They're a no-brainer, really, when one considers energy costs and per-socket/per-server software licensing fees."

- Scott Wassman, TechReport

Both ExtremeTech and TechReport make compelling upgrade arguments in their testing. Compared to a new system architecture like Nehalem, it is logistically less disruptive - technologically and economically - to certify a CPU upgrade versus as platform replacement. After internal certification, a BIOS and CPU upgrade takes about 20-minutes per system to implement. In a virtualized datacenter where low-level differences are abstracted-away by the hypervisor certification testing should be much less invasive. Likewise, rolling upgrades in a virtualized datacenter with vMotion technology can provide a non-disruptive path from 4-core to 6-core. As Case puts it:

"Simply put, by just upgrading five servers in a data center, data center managers can eliminate the need to purchase an additional server to meet performance needs."

- Lloyd Case, ExtremeTech

However, this "upgrade proposition" is a difficult position for AMD as it does little to sell new systems. Historically, CPU upgrades only happen in 10-15% of the installed base, making CPU sales based on BIOS/drop-in upgrades an interesting footnote. Integrators want to move new hardware with Instanbul pre-installed, not sell "upgrade packages." Perhaps the dynamics of the new economy will drive a statistical anomoly based on the strength of the Istanbul proposition. Datacenter managers face a familiar dilemma with some new twists.

First 48-core VMmark Appears

Following in the footsteps of the first 12-core VMmark comes the current champion at 33.85@24 tiles using 48-cores - and, despite the timing, it is not an Istanbul server. In fact, today's leader is the IBM System x3950 M2 running 8, 6-core Intel Xeon MP "Dunnington" X7460 processors with 256GB DDR2/667 RAM (5.3GB/core).

This score edges-out the previous champion - the HP ProLiant DL785 G5 with 8, 4-core Opteron 8393SE processors - which reigned at 31.56@21 tiles. In contrast to the 4-socket, 24-core IBM System x3850 M2 Xeon leading the 24-core category, this doubling of socket/core count resulted in only a 50% increase in capacity. This scaling inefficiency is less typical in 2P-to-4P transition but seems to plague the 4p-to-8P segment.

"The x3950 M2 is based on the fourth generation of IBM Enterprise X-Architecture®, and is designed to deliver innovation with enhanced reliability and availability features that enable optimal performance for databases, enterprise applications and virtualized environments."

- IBM News Blurb

"I'm really looking forward to even more virtualization benchmarks which are coming very soon."

- Elisabeth Stahl, IBM Benchmarking and Systems Performance Blog

Looking at the virtualization notes we discover what it takes to keep 48-cores fed to achieve such a benchmark:

• 4-QLogic QLE2462 HBA's (Dual-port, 4-Gbps FC)


• 1-IBM DS4800 with 4GB cache
  
  
  
  • 19 EXP 810 storage expansion units for
  
  
  • 1.8TB in 49 LUNs
    
    
    
    • 280 15K disks total
    
    
    
    
  
  
  
  


• 21 IBM x336 clients
  
  
  
  • DP 3.2GHz Xeon
  
  
  • 3GB RAM
  
  
  • Server 2003 R2
  
  
  
  


• 2 IBM x335 clients
  
  
  
  • DP Xeon 3.06GHz
  
  
  • 2.5GB RAM
  
  
  • Server 2003 R2
  
  
  
  


• Eight vSwitches
  
  
  
  • 120 ports total
  
  
  
  


• 4 Intel PRO 1000PT Dual-port 1Gb Ethernet controllers
  
  
  
  • one per vSwitch
  
  
  
  

While the Dunnington tops the list by sheer brute force, it's safe to assume that - given the 32-core Opteron is nipping at its heels - the 48-core Istanbul results will displace it soon (possibly alluded to in Elisabeth Stahl's "Benchmarking and Performance Blog" reference above). More interestingly, will AMD's much touted "HT Assist" allow the 8P Istanbul to break the 4P-to-8P "curse" of scaling inefficiency? If not, it would show that much work is needed before the relatively "massive " core counts of 2010 are upon us.

Quick Take: PC Pro Recommends 4-node-in-2U Platform

Boston Limited UK has recently received a "recommended" rating from PC Pro UK for its 4-node-in-2U platform with AMD's Istanbul processor on-board. Dubbed the "Boston Quattro 6000GP" and following-up on the 2-node-in-1U "Boston 3000GP" platform, this systems allows for 4-nodes with 2x AMD Istanbul processors per node. This formula yields 8 processors (48 cores) in 2U resulting in a core density of over 1,000 cores per standard 42U rack.

Computational density like this is bound for virtualization and HPC clusters. Judging from the recent reports on Istanbul's virtualization potential and HPL performance, this combination offers a compelling platform alternative to blade computing. In its review, PC Pro UK touched on the platform's power consumption, saying:

"In idle we saw one, two, three and four nodes draw a total of 234W, 349W, 497W and 630W. Under pressure these figures rose to 345W, 541W, 802W and 1026W respectively. Even if you could find an application that pushed the cores this hard you'll find each server node draws a maximum of 256W - not bad for a 12-core system. Dell's PowerEdge R900, reviewed in our sister title IT Pro, has four 130W X7450 six-core processors and that consumes 778W under heavy load."

- PC Pro, UK

Tyan: New Istanbul BIOS Released

Tyan joins the AMD 6-core release cycle with "Istanbul-enabled" BIOS releases six 2P motherboards (and related systems). We here from a reliable source that the Tyan "twin" system (B2985, 2-node, 1U) BIOS is in "alpha" testing and will be released "soon." Here's what's available now:

Dual-Opteron Motherboards (2000-series)

S2912-E, S2915-E, S2927, S2927-E, S2932, S2932-E

Notes

These BIOS releases were only available from Tyan's FTP site (ftp.tyan.com, anonymous access) until now. As of 6/17/2009 you will find them on the BIOS helper from the product web page.

Also, we were surprised to find that the AGESA for the S4985 series (quad-socket) motherboards are still version 3.3.0.3 and are likely not Istanbul-ready. We do not have the S4985 in our testing lab to confirm of deny this, but we have been told by AMD that 3.5.0.0 is the minimum Istanbul supported AGESA.

First 12-core VMmark for Istanbul Appears

VMware has posted the VMmark score for the first Istanbul-based system and it's from HP: the ProLiant DL385 G6. While it's not at the top of the VMmark chart at 15.54@11 tiles (technically it is at the top of the 12-core benchmark list), it still shows a compelling price-performance picture.

Comparing Istanbul's VMmark Scores

For comparison's sake, we've chosen the HP DL385 G5 and HP DL380 G6 as they were configured for their VMmark tests. In the case of the ProLiant DL380 G6, we could only configure the X5560 and not the X5570 as tested so the price is actually LOWER on the DL380 G6 than the "as tested" configuration. Likewise, we chose the PC-6400 (DDR2/667, 8x8GB) memory for the DL 385 G5 versus the more expensive PC-5300 (533) memory as configured in 2008.

As configured for pricing, each system comes with processor, memory, 2-SATA drives and VMware Infrastructure Standard for 2-processors. Note that in testing, additional NIC's, HBA, and storage are configured and such additions are not included herein. We have omitted these additional equipment features as they would be common to a deployment set and have no real influence on relative pricing.

Systems as Configured for Pricing Comparison

System		Processor		Speed		Cores		Threads		Memory		Speed		Street
HP ProLiant DL385 G5		Opteron 2384		2.7		8		8		64		667		$10,877.00
HP ProLiant DL385 G6		Opteron 2435		2.6		12		12		64		667		$11,378.00
HP ProLiant DL380 G6		Xeon X5560*		2.93		8		16		96		1066		$30,741.00

Here's some good news: 50% more cores for only 5% more (sound like an economic stimulus?) The comparison Nehalem-EP is nearly 3x the Istanbul system in price.

AMD Istanbul: Pricing, Specs and SKU's

Istanbul for 2P platforms are 2427, 2431 and 2435 running at 2.2GHz, 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz, respectively, and running at 75W average power. Initial pricing based on 1,000 unit quantity for the 2400 line-up is reported to be $455, $698 and $989 for the 2427, 2431 and 2435, respectively. As indicated, these will all be HT 3.0-enabled (backwards compatible to HT 1.0) and carry the improved memory controller.

For 4P and 8P systems, two SKUs are initially available: 8431 and 8435 at 2.4GHz and 2.6GHz, respectively. These 8400-series products are expected to be available at $2,149 and $2,649, respectively, in 1,000's quantities. We expect to see HT Assist play a big role in 4P/8P system refreshes/updates as 4-way stream memory bandwidth performance improve by as much as 60%.

Processor Pricing (1000's)

AMD "Istanbul" Opteron™ Processor Family
2400 Series		Price		8400 Series		Price
Six-Core AMD Opteron 2435		$989		Six-Core AMD Opteron 8435		$2,649
Six-Core AMD Opteron 2431		$698		Six-Core AMD Opteron 8431		$2,149
Six-Core AMD Opteron 2427		$455

Istanbul 2400 Specifications

Server Watch: Istanbul, G34, C32, Itanium and Nehalem-EX

Istanbul is launching in June, 2009 and will be a precursor to the G34 and C32 platforms to come in Q1/2010. To that end, AMD will be providing an overview of its next generation of Direct Connect Architecture, or DCA 2.0, which which separates Socket-F systems from G34/C32. This overview will be available as a live webcast on June 1, 2009 at 11:00AM Central Time. In advance of the announcement, AMD has (silently) reduced prices for its Opteron processors across the board. This move will place additional pressure on Intel's Nehalem-EP systems already weakened (virtualization) price-performance.

We expect to hear more news about Istanbul's availability in keeping with Tyan's upcoming announcement next week. Based on current technology and economic trends, Istanbul and G34 could offer AMD a solid one-two punch to counter Intel's relentless "tick-tock" pace. With Nehalem servers sales weak despite early expectations and compounding economic pressures, market timing may be more ideally suited for AMD's products than Intel's for a change. As Gartner puts it, "the timing of Nehalem is a bit off, and it probably won't make much of an impact this year."

In the meantime, Phil Hughes at AMD has a posted a personal reflection on Opteron's initial launch, starting with the IBM e325 in 2003, and ending with Opteron's impact on the Intel Itanium market by year-end (while resisting a reference to "the sinking of the Itanic"). Phil acknowledges Sun's influence on Opteron and links to some news articles from 2003. See his full post, "The Sun Also Rises," here... As 64-bit processors go, 2003 was much more the year of the Opteron rather than "the year of the Itanium" (as predicted by Intel's Paul Otellini.)

Speaking of Itanium, TechWorld has an article outlining how Intel's upcoming Nehalem-EX - with the addition of MCA technology derived from Itanium - could bring an end to the beleagered proprietary platform. TechWorld cites Insight 64 analyst Nathan Brookwood as saying the new Xeon will finally break Intel's policy of artificially crippling of the x86 processor which has prevented Xeon from being competitive with Itanium. The 8-core, SMT-enabled EX processor was being demonstrated by IBM in an 8-socket configuration.

Quick Take: AMD Istanbul Update

AMD was gracious enough to invite us to their Reviewer's Day on May 20th to have a final look at "Istanbul" and discuss their plans for the product's upcoming release. While much of the information we received is embargoed until the June, 2009 release date, we can tell you that we've have received a couple of AMD's new 6-core "Istanbul" Opterons for testing and review. We'll look forward to seeing "Istanbul" in action inside our lab over the next couple of weeks. Our verdict will be available at launch.

Instead of typical benchmarks, we'll be focusing on Istanbul's implications for vSphere before the new Opteron hits the streets (remember 6-core is the limit for "free" and "reduced capability" vSphere license). If what we saw from AMD's internal testing at Reviewer's Day is accurate , then our AMD/VMware Eco-System partners are going to be very happy with the results. What we can confirm today is that AGESA 3.3.0.3+ 3.5.0.0+ is required to run Istanbul, so start looking for BIOS updates from your vendors as the launch date approaches. The systems we reported on from Tyan back in April will be good-to-go at launch (our GT28 test systems are already running it require a beta BIOS).

SOLORI's take: We made a somewhat bold prediction on April 30, 2009 that "Shanghai-Istanbul Eco-System looks like an economic stimulus all its own" when comparing the AMD upgrade path to Intel's (rip and replace) where VMware infrastructures are concerned. That article, Shanghai Economics 101, was one of our most popular AMD-related postings yet, and - judging from what we've seen already - it looks like we may have been correct!

While we're impressed with the ability to flawlessly vMotion from socket 940 to socket-F, we were more impressed with the ability to insert an Istanbul into a Barcelona or Shanghai system and immediately realize the benefits. We're going to look at our review samples, revisit our price-performance data and Watt/VM calculations before making sweeping recommendation. However, we expect to find Istanbul to be a very good match to on-premise cloud/virtualization initiatives.

SOLORI's 2nd take: VDI and databased consolidation systems running on 4P AMD boxes are about to take a giant leap forward. We can't wait to see 24-core and 48-core VMmark scores updated over the next two months. Start asking your system vendor for updated BIOS supporting AGESA 3.5.0.0+ (Tyan are you listening? Supermicro's AS2041M is already there), and get your 4P test mule updated and prepare to be amazed...

Magny-Cours Spotted

[caption id="" align="alignright" width="175" caption="Magny-Cours, 12-core Processor"][/caption]

AMD's next generation "G34" socket Magny-Cours processor was spotted recently by XbitLabs running in AMD's 4-way test mule platform. We've talked about Magny-Cours and socket-G34 before, but had no picture until now. The multi-chip module (MCM) heritage is obvious given it's rectangular shape.

Critical for AMD will be HT3+DCA2 efficiency and memory bandwidth to counter the apparent success of Nehalem-EP's SMT technology. Although AMD does not consider hyperthreading to be a viable technology for them, it appears to be working for Intel in benchmark cases.

While seems logical that more "physical" cores should scale better than the "logical" cores provided by SMT, Intel is making some ground of legacy "physical core" systems, demonstrating what appears to be a linear scaling in VMmark. However, Intel has a fine reputation for chasing - and mastering - benchmark performance only to show marginal gains in real-world applications.

Meanwhile, the presure mounts on Instanbul's successful launch in June with white box vendors making ready for the next wave of "product release buzz" to stimulate sinking sales. Decision makers will have a lot of spreadsheet work to do to determine where the real price performance lies. Based on the high-cost of dense DDR3 and DDR2, the 16-DIMM/CPU advantage is weighing heavily on AMD's side from a CAPEX and OPEX perspective (DDR2 is already a well-entrenched component of all socket-F platforms).

Up to now, Intel's big benchmark winners have been the W5580 and X5570 with $1,700 and $1,500 unit prices, respectively. Compounded with high-cost DDR3 dual-rank memory, or reduction in memory bandwidth (which eliminates a significant advantage), the high-end Nehalem-EP is temporarily caught in an economic bind, severely limiting its price-performance suitability.

Opteron Turns 6: Plus Istanbul and a New Road-map

AMD released an updated technology road-map for it's Opteron processor family, beginning with the early availability of Istanbul - its Socket-F compatible 6-core processor - shipping for revenue in May and available from OEM's in June. This information was delivered in a webcast today.

[caption id="" align="alignright" width="214" caption="AMD Istanbul 6-core Processor"][/caption]

"...up to 30 percent more performance within the same power envelope and on the same platform as current Quad-Core AMD Opteron..."

Additionally, AMD updated the availability of its Direct Connect Architecture 2.0 to be available only in the Opteron 4000 and 6000 series (socket C32 and G34, respectively). Companies waiting for the 12-core "Magny-Cours" processor will have to switch to the G34 platform in 2010. AMD announced that it is already shipping this 45nm part to sampling partners, and some customers will receive parts in 2H/2009. Magny-Cours is expected to be available from OEM's and system vendors in 1H/2010.

"Opteron 4000 series is also planned for introduction in 2010 for 1P and 2P servers and designed to address virtualized Web and cloud computing environments. The 4000 series will launch with 4- and 6-core processors..."

AMD believes, with core counts on the rise, dense computing (HPC and data center virtualization or cloud) will rely on the 4000 series and its more "green friendly" low power parts called "EE" offering comparable performance at 40W average power. This will create a differential in the server space between 4000 and 6000 (much like 2000 and 8000 today) but with overlap in the 2P market (unlike 2000/8000). The 6000 series is envisioned as a "high performance computing" part where power sensitivity is not the major concern.