On TechRepublic: Why Linux will triumph over Windows
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 1 of 20:
Next »
Sure!
Why not!? For many tasks the CPU is perfect.
Webserving, filesharing, and other simple SMB
apps.

The consumer crowd is successfully doing HD
video decoding, and other CPU intensive tasks.

Looking at Exch, SQL, virtualization probably
nor.

It all comes down to profit. Xeon's are
profitable, Atom's are probably not. Most
OEM's wont do what's in the interest of the
customer, only the shareholders.
Posted by: unredeemed   Posted on: 03/09/09 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Sure!  unredeemed | 03/09/09
For low power, Arm is a better option. But, I also wonder if Arm will ever  DonnieBoy | 03/09/09
Why not?  TripleII | 03/09/09
RE: Would you run a server using Intel's Atom processor?  bobiroc | 03/09/09
Is it AV?  TripleII | 03/09/09
You are using Dell  itguy08 | 03/09/09
Meaningless article - depends on what the server does  croberts | 03/09/09
Stacking cores  LiquidLearner | 03/09/09
RE: Would you run a server using Intel's Atom processor?  MSFTWorshipper | 03/09/09
RE: Home Server: Seems you've answered your own blog  V@... | 03/09/09
Why not ?  stevebzdnet | 03/10/09
yes  rtirman37@... | 03/10/09
Yes, for some applications  QuimaxW | 03/10/09
Low power consumption and high performance days are over  evolucion8 | 03/10/09
RE: Would you run a server using Intel's Atom processor?  pistonhead | 03/10/09
I'm already doing it  davagain | 03/10/09
You bet.  Hates Idiots | 03/11/09
RE: Would you run a server using Intel's Atom processor?  cobra54 | 03/13/09
The Atom is the same as the first Windows Server 2003 boxes I built  georgeou | 04/07/09
With Linux? Sure...  no_zd_user_name | 04/07/09

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here