<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>IBM bets on Opterons for its blades</title>
		<description>Discuss IBM bets on Opterons for its blades</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 12:44:34 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/20041/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-5489</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Naterm... not exactly. I've seen offering of shanghai and barcelona of a half and down to a 3th of what magny-cours is selling. Granted, performance per die/chip size is less, but they offer a much better value overall, unless you have deep pockets, then we're talking about something else.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 12:40:13 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-5489</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>INSPIREARUN says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3318</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Intel's upcoming Sandy Bridge's Benchmarks- Defeats Bulldozer , Expels Nehalem http://lensfire.blogspot.com/2010/09/entry-level-sandy-bridge-will-end-up.html]]></description>
			<dc:creator>INSPIREARUN</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 20:28:21 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3318</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3304</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I don't know what you're talking about when you say previous generations. Considering IT departments are concerned with things far beyond the price of the kit, particularly how much it's going to cost to run. It makes a lot more sense to buy new stuff. Servers are becoming consolidated pools of processing power, memory, and storage. The more you can cram into a given space and power draw, the better. New stuff will let you cram more VMs onto less machines, consume less power at the server, and consume less power to cool the server. I think the Opteron 6100s make sense for certain situations, basically when you need more than two processors per server but you don't need the massive memory capacity and RAS features of the Xeon 7500. Apparently this situation is rare.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 02:56:06 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3304</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3261</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I agree... most companies will go for previous or before-previous generation when it comes to upgrades, best bang for the buck. As for Oracle, well, they're dog poop anyway, a software company can't manage a hardware business very well so who cares.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 15:35:59 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3261</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3215</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This thing is a 2U rack server, not a blade. As for the comments, most IT departments aren't going to swap their CPUs. It does make it easier for IBM to incorporate the next generation of AMD processors assuming they fit into the same thermal and power envelope. The real story here is that IBM, a long time Opteron supporter, isn't particularly interested in this chip. As for Oracle (Sun Micro), they've all but confirmed that they're dumping AMD for good.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:25:25 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3215</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>blandead says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3206</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yea Magny-Cours is Socket G34 and my understanding is bulldozer should use same HT technology (6400mhz) so I don't think they will need to change the socket for server version. Should be an 8 module-16 core chip for server.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>blandead</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:39:54 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3206</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>aussiebear says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3177</link>
			<description><![CDATA[They are Socket G34 based blades, aren't they? So we can expect Opteron 6200 (Bulldozer) support as well?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>aussiebear</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:52:13 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/20041-ibm-bets-on-opterons-for-its-blades#comment-3177</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
