best hardware plataform for openbsd

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

best hardware plataform for openbsd

Gustavo Rios
I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
of course: Intel and AMD. For the 64 bit version, which delivers the
best relation price/benefits?

Thanks in advance.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Daniel Ouellet
Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> of course: Intel and AMD. For the 64 bit version, which delivers the
> best relation price/benefits?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>

Why even asked these days!

Until Intel come clean, use AMD.

I don't understand why you even have to asked that question!

If you are true to the Open Source projects and really want to support
OpenBSD as well, why don't you advocate the movements with your wallets
as well and cast your vote for hardware makers that actually respect
your choice of OS!

I just don't understand why users still don't get it!!!

Best luck in your choice

Daniel

PS: AMD is better anyway, so you can't go wrong, but vote for your OS of
choice and put your money where you mouth should be! Support the REAL
open hardware makes and ditch the rest until they get it!

Get it???

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Stuart Henderson
In reply to this post by Gustavo Rios
On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> of course: Intel and AMD.

There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also make a *HUGE* difference,
of course.

> For the 64 bit version, which delivers the best relation price/benefits?

Nobody can say that unless they know what you think is beneficial.
You have to first define what you want, then go looking for something
suitable.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Gustavo Rios
I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
That's it.

On 10/7/06, Stuart Henderson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> > I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> > of course: Intel and AMD.
>
> There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
> more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also make a *HUGE* difference,
> of course.
>
> > For the 64 bit version, which delivers the best relation price/benefits?
>
> Nobody can say that unless they know what you think is beneficial.
> You have to first define what you want, then go looking for something
> suitable.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Daniel Ouellet
Gustavo Rios wrote:
> I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
> That's it.

Then go for AMD, they have more instructions then Intel that now try to
catch up to them!

So, call it more instructions machine per dollar if you like that!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Stuart Henderson
In reply to this post by Stuart Henderson
On 2006/10/07 18:08, Brian wrote:

> > There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> > the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
> > more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also make a *HUGE* difference,
> > of course.
>
> I am looking at upgrading my motherboard and processor.  It looks like NVIDIA
> is still not open source friendly.  I saw some blobs on their site for FreeBSD
> with very restrictive licenses.
>
> I am seeing some VIA, SIS, and ATI motherboards that support AM2 sockets as
> alternatives to NVIDIA.  I am looking at upgrading to a dual core amd64 X2
> processor.  Will this work with bsd.mp?

Depends on the motherboard/chipset/bios. Also results may vary depending on
which OpenBSD arch you use (e.g. I tried an AMD 8111/8131 based 2U server,
running i386 MP kernel it hangs occasionally but has been rock-solid under
amd64).

> And what chipset vendor is the most open with documentation?

For the processors using hypertransport (I was going to say AMD processors,
but it's used on some PowerPC boxes too) the most open chipset vendor is
probably AMD themselves, but they aren't exactly used on desktop motherboards
(or even much on server boards these days). Just by searching for the part
numbers (e.g. 8111) you quickly find datasheets and information on revisions;
any vendor should be making that type of information openly available.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_739_9004,00.html

As you see from my example, open docs don't guarantee that everything
works, but they make the job of making it work at all a lot easier (and
I'm happy enough to have this particular box running the 64-bit kernel).

> I am leaning towards ATI. I want to support the open vendors with my cash.

afaik, they're not particularly open. It may change with the AMD merger,
who knows... I have a small pile of motherboards from when I was upgrading
my desktop box that didn't really work well enough (I was trying to avoid
nvidia of course), in the end I decided to buy whatever I could locally
so that I'd return it if there was a problem. All I could find was nvidia,
which I wasn't terribly happy about buying, but it worked, size of pile
stopped increasing... don't get me wrong, this is not advice to buy from
nvidia, it's advice to buy from somewhere where you can easily return
the board for a refund if you don't like it :-)

(and, I don't know about the AM2 socket/retention mechanism, but if it's
anything like S939 be damn careful removing the CPU if you do have to move
it between boards...bye bye one 146, thanks for the glue-like thermal
compound AMD..!)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

viq .
On 08/10/06, Stuart Henderson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2006/10/07 18:08, Brian wrote:
> > > There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> > > the faster arch's too (and if you don't need out-and-out speed there are
> > > more to choose from). Motherboard chipsets also make a *HUGE* difference,
> > > of course.
> >
> > I am looking at upgrading my motherboard and processor.  It looks like NVIDIA
> > is still not open source friendly.  I saw some blobs on their site for FreeBSD
> > with very restrictive licenses.
> >
> > I am seeing some VIA, SIS, and ATI motherboards that support AM2 sockets as
> > alternatives to NVIDIA.  I am looking at upgrading to a dual core amd64 X2
> > processor.  Will this work with bsd.mp?
>
> Depends on the motherboard/chipset/bios. Also results may vary depending on
> which OpenBSD arch you use (e.g. I tried an AMD 8111/8131 based 2U server,
> running i386 MP kernel it hangs occasionally but has been rock-solid under
> amd64).
>
> > And what chipset vendor is the most open with documentation?
>
> For the processors using hypertransport (I was going to say AMD processors,
> but it's used on some PowerPC boxes too) the most open chipset vendor is
> probably AMD themselves, but they aren't exactly used on desktop motherboards
> (or even much on server boards these days). Just by searching for the part
> numbers (e.g. 8111) you quickly find datasheets and information on revisions;
> any vendor should be making that type of information openly available.
>
> http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_739_9004,00.html
>
> As you see from my example, open docs don't guarantee that everything
> works, but they make the job of making it work at all a lot easier (and
> I'm happy enough to have this particular box running the 64-bit kernel).
>
> > I am leaning towards ATI. I want to support the open vendors with my cash.
>
> afaik, they're not particularly open. It may change with the AMD merger,
> who knows... I have a small pile of motherboards from when I was upgrading
> my desktop box that didn't really work well enough (I was trying to avoid
> nvidia of course), in the end I decided to buy whatever I could locally
> so that I'd return it if there was a problem. All I could find was nvidia,
> which I wasn't terribly happy about buying, but it worked, size of pile
> stopped increasing... don't get me wrong, this is not advice to buy from
> nvidia, it's advice to buy from somewhere where you can easily return
> the board for a refund if you don't like it :-)

How about VIA chipsets, any opinion about boards having those? Say,
Asus M2V (Via K8T890) ?

> (and, I don't know about the AM2 socket/retention mechanism, but if it's
> anything like S939 be damn careful removing the CPU if you do have to move
> it between boards...bye bye one 146, thanks for the glue-like thermal
> compound AMD..!)
>
>


--
viq

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Diana Eichert
In reply to this post by Gustavo Rios
On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:

> I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
> That's it.

Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are the intended
uses?  For example, for a DNS server I would seriously consider some of
the platforms recently added, armish for one.

diana

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Gustavo Rios
I would use them for a X server. It will serve about 128 X clients.

On 10/8/06, Diana Eichert <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
>
> > I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant amount of money!
> > That's it.
>
> Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are the intended
> uses?  For example, for a DNS server I would seriously consider some of
> the platforms recently added, armish for one.
>
> diana

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Mark Bucciarelli-2
In reply to this post by Gustavo Rios
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
>
> > I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant
> > amount of money!  That's it.
>
> Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are
> the intended uses?  For example, for a DNS server I would
> seriously consider some of the platforms recently added, armish
> for one.

What advantages do you see from building a DNS server using
armish?

m

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Julien Cabillot
It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
expression is ok), the size, ...

On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> >
> > > I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant
> > > amount of money!  That's it.
> >
> > Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are
> > the intended uses?  For example, for a DNS server I would
> > seriously consider some of the platforms recently added, armish
> > for one.
>
> What advantages do you see from building a DNS server using
> armish?
>
> m
>
>


--
Julien Cabillot

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Diana Eichert
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Cabillot Julien wrote:

> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...
>
> On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
SNIP
> > What advantages do you see from building a DNS server using
> > armish?
> >
> > m
>
> --
> Julien Cabillot

Spot On

diana

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Nico Meijer
In reply to this post by Julien Cabillot
Hi Julien,

> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...

This also holds true for Via Epia Mini-ITX boards, btw. Plus, most fit in
an 1U 19" enclosure or any standard (micro) ATX case.

That said, I know nothing of armish.

Buhbye... Nico

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Mike Hernandez-3
In reply to this post by Julien Cabillot
On Oct 12, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Cabillot Julien wrote:

> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if  
> this
> expression is ok), the size, ...
>
> On 10/12/06, Mark Bucciarelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:31:39AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
>>> On Sun, 8 Oct 2006, Gustavo Rios wrote:
>>>
>>>> I meant more CPU processing cycles per a given constant
>>>> amount of money!  That's it.
>>>
>>> Hmmm, before I answer that question I'd like to know what are
>>> the intended uses?  For example, for a DNS server I would
>>> seriously consider some of the platforms recently added, armish
>>> for one.
>>
>> What advantages do you see from building a DNS server using
>> armish?
>>
>> m
>>
>>
>

And most of the time DNS doesn't require much in the way of  
resources, at least from my experience. I imagine it could use more  
resources if you are doing IPV6 and DNSSEC (as it says in the bind  
manual).

Mike

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Stuart Henderson
In reply to this post by Julien Cabillot
On 2006/10/12 15:42, Cabillot Julien wrote:
> It's no very expensive, the "electric consumption" (I don't know if this
> expression is ok), the size, ...

... socketed RAM, serial console :-)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
In reply to this post by Stuart Henderson
On 10/8/06, Stuart Henderson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> > I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> > of course: Intel and AMD.
>
> There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> the faster arch's too <SNIP>

isnt the mac going the way of Intel now? all of their newer boxes seem
to be Intel now (correct me if i'm wrong), in which case... u shouldnt
get a mac, i mean, an Intel.

-jf

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: best hardware plataform for openbsd

Stuart Henderson
On 2006/10/13 02:24, Jeffrey Lim wrote:

> On 10/8/06, Stuart Henderson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >On 2006/10/07 19:29, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> >> I am evaluating processor hardware for using with openbsd. Two options
> >> of course: Intel and AMD.
> >
> >There are more options than just those. macppc and sparc64 are amongst
> >the faster arch's too <SNIP>
>
> isnt the mac going the way of Intel now? all of their newer boxes seem
> to be Intel now (correct me if i'm wrong), in which case... u shouldnt
> get a mac, i mean, an Intel.

xserve too? that's a pity. at least places like
http://www.2ndchancepc.co.uk/ex-demo.html still sell them.