Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 01:07:24 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: lars.tunkrans@bredband.net Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: dual vs single core opteron 100's Message-ID: <20060128140724.GB2341@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20060128101221.ZTBV8741.mxfep04.bredband.com@mxfep04> References: <20060128101221.ZTBV8741.mxfep04.bredband.com@mxfep04>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2006-Jan-28 11:12:21 +0100, lars.tunkrans@bredband.net wrote: > Seems to defeat the purpose , If you want to build a reliable > Server you want Registred ECC RAM. ( socket 940 ) > If you want to build a cheap desktop machine you want un-registred > non-ECC RAM. ( socket 939 ) According to the posting you quoted, you can have non-registered ECC RAM on a socket-939 so that provides a third alternative: A low-end server with limited RAM capacity using socket-939 and unregistered ECC RAM. > Only application I can think of for using non-reliable servers > built with socket 939 is compute clusters where you have several > hundred compute servers, and you are not dependent on whether an > individual server runs all the time. You probably still want ECC RAM so that you can rely on the answers that your compute server is providing. -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060128140724.GB2341>