NWC | Feature | Infrastructure | Servers: The Next Generation |

NEWS BLOGS FORUMS NEWSLETTERS RESEARCH EVENTS DIGITAL LIBRARY CAREERS

IMMERSE YOURSELF:

Storage & Servers

F E A T U R E

Servers: The Next Generation

September 15, 2002
By Art Wittmann

	Issue TOC
	Print full article
	Print this page
	Download as PDF
	E-Mail this URL
	Flame the author

	In this article
	Introduction
	Cutting Costs
	HP: A Big Unknown
	Executive Summary
	Epoll Results

It's a funny thing about servers: Every time we look to improve the breed, we turn the device on its side. In the evolution of the PC as server we started with desktop systems, then flipped to towers, then flipped again to racks. The most recent turn brings us to blades--complete systems on a card inserted into a rack-based chassis. But more than the form factor has been turned sideways during the past two years. The industry also has seen a reordering of priorities. As applications migrate from mainframes and specialized Unix boxes to Intel servers, and as the Web becomes a more viable user interface, the number of Intel servers has grown substantially while IT staffing levels have remained relatively unchanged.

We set out to learn how the three market leaders--Dell Computer Corp., Hewlett-Packard Co. and IBM Corp.--envision the server landscape of the next few years. We asked the vendors to focus their comments on Intel-based rackmount servers--i.e., servers made for the data center. As you might expect, the stories we got were largely consistent. Yet there were also important differences in their approaches and in how well the vendors have executed on their visions. Dell, for example, touted its design abilities, with custom design and innovative form factors resulting in more cost-effective systems. IBM talked about bringing mainframe reliability features down to its Intel-based systems and tying all its server lines together under one management umbrella. More on the specifics of what each company has in store. Here's the scoop on the direction in general.

The market loves 1U and 2U rack servers, which pack the greatest number of systems into a square foot, affordably. Dell, in particular, is doing well in this area. Look for a steady march of new 1U and 2U offerings that feature more processing power--including four-way systems--and fault-tolerant features, such as hot-swap power supplies and cooling fans. Although these systems continue to be space-efficient and inexpensive, they don't provide much in the way of management enhancements over their 4U and 8U forebears. Furthermore, such slim boxes have less room for the cooling devices required by Intel's latest and hottest-running chips, Itanium and Xeon. Dell says it expects to soup up the 1U and 2U boxes' fans and cooling packs, but the most powerful servers still require the larger form factor.

For ISPs and managed-service providers--organizations looking to pack even more systems into a given space and increase manageability--blade servers are loaded with promise. Blade systems share power supplies and cooling, and eliminate a good number of cables by sharing a backplane for everything from mouse and keyboard ports to network- and storage-system connections.

Blade systems sound like a no-brainer, but beware of landmines. Do you recall card cages from Bay Networks, Cabletron and 3Com that never delivered on their promise of ultra-low-cost network ports? To get to the low price points, those boxes had to be stuffed full of the network gear of the day. Most buyers found that if they didn't fill the card cage immediately, they never did. New technologies forced them to abandon the box or spend ridiculous amounts of money to upgrade it. So it can be with blades. HP, through its acquisition of Compaq, is a leader in this space. Dell and IBM have not yet shipped their blade offerings, yet HP is already introducing its second generation, having orphaned its first blade lineup by providing no upgrade for its 10/100 Ethernet offering.

The vendors are hot on the higher-performance trail as well, with systems out or planned for up to 16-way multiprocessing. In this arena, we tested quad-processor servers equipped with the Intel Xeon MP processor--the most powerful on the market. IBM touts its Enterprise X-Architecture, which includes memory and I/O support chips developed internally--though the IBM eServer xSeries x255 we tested, along with the Dell and HP servers (see "Dell Serves Up a Winner"), included the ServerWorks Grand Champion HE chipset. IBM has embraced Intel's 64-bit Itanium architecture and is planning systems that will use Intel's McKinley chip, the second Itanium generation.

Making sense of HP's deep involvement with Itanium development and Compaq's superior management story will be one of HP's most significant challenges. HP's ProLiant team is high on Itanium. It appears that within HP, however, Itanium development will be done largely by HP's staff, while the ProLiant team will handle management and silicon support. Dell, for its part, says its investment is best spent in four-way to 16-way systems based on Pentium Xeon MP chips. Dell is taking a pass on the McKinley chip--much to Intel's chagrin.