That addresses nothing.
Okay, this is where I think it gets complex. I agree with @Ericloewe about why Xeon D is popular. There's a lot of desire for familiarity within the IT/cloud world.The ARM server market is mostly handwaving bull****. Why do you think the big cloud guys are gobbling up Xeon D? It hits the low power market without being a ridiculous construct with 32 cores that needs eight separate memory controllers and it integrates proven platform features such as Intel 10GbE.
Sure, but the reality is that if this was going to reshape the world, it's had about two years to do so, and doesn't seem to have. Instead, Intel released Xeon D.This old news(2014) is interesting too, as HP was one of those "early adopters", they claimed 35% reduction in overall cost of ownership with their ARM servers, that's not insignificant.
Yeah. Well there's been a lot of talk for a lot of years. Smooth-Stone was doing this back in 2008 with their 5 watt cores and still here we are today, years later, no significant progress seems to have been made, there aren't tons of ARM server boards floating around. If one of these companies can actually deliver on something that Intel can't easily match or beat, we might have something interesting going on. Competition is certainly good.
I had been wondering what had happened to their grandiose plans for Atom, with the yearly die shrinks. Looks like the answer is "seriously downsized".And in the news today, Intel throws in the towel on Atom.
Which we could take as a signal that it is just as hard for Intel to horn in on ARM's massively successful smartphone and tablet markets as it is for ARM to horn in on Intel's territory.
I think the writing's been on the wall for awhile, with the sudden screeching halt of Avoton and the introduction of Xeon D that fills a similar niche. I think I even talked about Intel seeming conflicted here awhile back.I had been wondering what had happened to their grandiose plans for Atom, with the yearly die shrinks. Looks like the answer is "seriously downsized".
They kinda already have a Xeon D for small devices, it's Core M. Same uArch, but produced on the power-tuned version of their current process.I think the writing's been on the wall for awhile, with the sudden screeching halt of Avoton and the introduction of Xeon D that fills a similar niche. I think I even talked about Intel seeming conflicted here awhile back.
So who wants to take bets on how long it'll be before they try to get tablets to adopt the low core count Xeon D parts ... I have to say, I'm not a huge Intel fan, so after the pasting they gave AMD in the late 2000's, I would find it ... amusing ... to see them try something like that, and then have them flail about for another five years.
Xeon D can't compete with ARM at the current pricing though.
In general, a NAS doesn't make use of that much. PCIe 3.0 is 8Gbps per lane, which means you could potentially have a pair of 10Gbps ethernet and disk I/O and still be pretty good even on just 8 PCIe lanes. Since most NAS platforms are still on 1GbE this seems like a lesser issue.Apologies if this turns out to be troll kibble, but.. I didn't see anyone mention it yet..
I'm always amused when ARM vs x86 comes up in the context of servers that move a lot of data.. I have yet to see an ARM implementation that can support the plumbing necessary to build a platform with good I/O capacity.. I see arm chips boasting 8 PCIe v3 lanes vs 40 lanes on Broadwell-EP.
Suitability is measured by more than just ghz and threads.
So crap out a readily available motherboard that has usable hardware and I'm sure someone might consider a port FreeNAS to it. Until that happens, and it shows no signs of happening, this is basically geek ******y of the VHS-vs-Betamax variety.You guys might want to have a look at: http://www.linleygroup.com/cms_builder/uploads/x-gene-3-white-paper-final.pdf
The x-gen-3 stomps all over Xeon-D especially with 5x memory bandwidth .... yep ARM really is dead ;)