Dell PowerEdge 12th Generation Entry-Level Tower...

Burton Finley | Solutions Performance Analysis

Dell PowerEdge 12th Generation

Entry-Level Tower Servers

A performance comparison of Dell PowerEdge and HP ProLiant entry-level tower servers

Dell PowerEdge 12th Generation Entry-Level Tower Servers

ii

This document is for informational purposes only and may contain typographical errors and technical inaccuracies. The content is provided as is, without express or implied warranties of any kind.

© 2012 Dell Inc. All rights reserved. Dell and its affiliates cannot be responsible for errors or omissions in typography or photography. Dell, the Dell logo, and PowerEdge are trademarks of Dell Inc. AMD, Athlon, Phenom, and combinations thereof, are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. IBM is a registered trademark IBM in the United States. Intel and Xeon are registered trademarks of Intel Corporation in the U.S. and other countries. Microsoft, Windows, and Windows Server are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Other trademarks and trade names may be used in this document to refer to either the entities claiming the marks and names or their products. Dell disclaims proprietary interest in the marks and names of others.

August 2012| Rev 1.0


iii

Contents Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 5

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5

Key findings .............................................................................................................. 5

Processor performance ............................................................................................... 5

Cryptographic bandwidth (security encryption).................................................................. 5

Methodology ............................................................................................................. 5

Comparison 1: processor performance, part 1 .................................................................... 6

Results ................................................................................................................... 7

Comparison 1: processor performance, part 2 .................................................................... 7

Results ................................................................................................................... 8

Comparison 2: cryptographic bandwidth (security encryption) ................................................ 9

Results ................................................................................................................... 9

Summary ................................................................................................................ 10

Appendix A — Test methodology ................................................................................... 11

SPECjbb2005 .......................................................................................................... 11

SPECjbb2005 BIOS settings ......................................................................................... 11

SPECjbb2005 OS tuning ............................................................................................. 12

SPECjbb2005 configuration ........................................................................................ 12

SiSoftware Sandra ................................................................................................... 12

Sandra BIOS settings ................................................................................................ 13

Sandra OS tuning ..................................................................................................... 13

Appendix B — Server hardware configuration information .................................................... 14

Appendix C — Server firmware and drivers ....................................................................... 16

Appendix D — Comparison 1 and 2 detailed results ............................................................. 17

Comparison 1: SPECjbb2005 results .............................................................................. 17

Comparison 2: Sandra cryptographic bandwidth results ..................................................... 21

Tables

Table 1. Detailed configuration for comparison 1 ............................................................... 6

Table 2. SPECjbb2005 BIOS settings for each system ......................................................... 11

Table 3. Sandra BIOS settings for each system ................................................................ 13

Table 4. Server hardware configuration information ......................................................... 14

Table 5. Server firmware and drivers ........................................................................... 16


iv

Figures

Figure 1. Comparison 1 - Sandra processor performance benchmarks ....................................... 7

Figure 2. Comparison 1 - processor performance – SPECjbb2005 benchmark ............................... 8

Figure 3. Comparison 2 - SiSoftware Sandra cryptographic bandwidth (Gb/s) .............................. 9

Figure 4. Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T110 II ............................... 17

Figure 5. Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T420 ................................. 18

Figure 6. Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T320 ................................. 19

Figure 7. Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for HP Proliant MicroServer .............................. 20

Figure 8. Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC ................. 21


5

Executive summary The intention of this competitive analysis is to compare Dell and HP® entry-level server options for customers looking to purchase replacement servers. The Dell PowerEdge™ T110 II, Dell PowerEdge T320, Dell PowerEdge T420, HP Proliant MicroServer, and HP Compaq® 6005 Pro Business PC were compared. While not a true “server”, the HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC was included in this study to show the benefits of purchasing an actual server, instead of using a converted desktop PC.

Introduction Using the industry standard benchmarks SPECjbb2005 and SiSoftware System ANalyser, Diagnostic and Reporting Assistant (Sandra), these servers were rated according to performance. The results showed Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers had the highest performance scores in all benchmark categories, including processor and cryptographic bandwidth. For more information on SPECjbb2005 and SiSoftware System Analyser, see Appendix A — Test methodology.

Key findings This section summarizes the key findings from this study for power and performance.

Processor performance

• The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers provided higher raw processing performance than each of the HP servers in all benchmark comparisons.

• The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers outperformed the HP servers by at least 2.6 times in all Sandra processor benchmarks, with the highest win being 87 times better than the HP Proliant MicroServer.

• The SPECjbb2005 benchmark comparison showed the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers to have a 1.7 times performance advantage over the HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC for Java Virtual Machine (JVM) processing and up to 23 times the performance of the HP Proliant MicroServer.

Cryptographic bandwidth (security encryption)

The Sandra benchmark includes a processor subtest that measures the cryptographic performance of the most common security algorithms in use today. The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers outperformed both of the HP servers by at least 4.6 times, and by as much as 65 times, making PowerEdge the best entry-level server for data security and e-commerce applications.

Test methodology and detailed results are documented in this paper.

Methodology SPECjbb2005 is an industry standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC) to measure a server’s performance across multiple utilization levels.

For further details see the appendices at the end of this document.


6

Comparison 1: processor performance, part 1 When comparing servers, one of the most important variables to consider is overall processor performance. Since all of the servers in this study do not represent the same processor/chipset architectures, it was not possible to compare identical processors directly, so each system was configured for maximum performance for each processor type.

The configuration used in Comparison 1 is summarized in Table 1.

Detailed configuration for comparison 1 Table 1.

Feature Dell PowerEdge T110 II

Dell PowerEdge T320

Dell PowerEdge T420

HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC


Sockets/form factor

1S/Tower 1S/Tower 2S/Tower 1S/Tower 1S/Tower

Processors Intel® Xeon® E3-1280 v2 3.6GHz

Intel Xeon E5-2470 2.3GHz

Intel Xeon E5-2450 2.1GHz

AMD® Athlon™ II Neo N36L 1.3GHz

AMD Phenom™ II X4 B95 3.0GHz

Physical/logical cores

4/8 8/16 16/32 2/2 4/4

Memory (run at maximum speed processor will support)

2 x 8GB 1600MT/s UDIMMS at 1600MT/s

6 x 8GB 1600MT/s RDIMMS at 1600MT/s

12 x 8GB 1600MT/s RDIMMS at 1600MT/s



JVM Instances/ type

2 x IBM® J9 JVM

4 x IBM J9 JVM

8 x IBM J9 JVM

1 x IBM J9 JVM

2 x IBM J9 JVM

The SiSoftware Sandra processor benchmark has several subtests that are used to analyze processor performance. These subtests measure numerical integer calculations, floating-point operations, and rendering of complex images. Figure 1 shows the raw performance scores for each server on each of the four processor workloads.


7

Comparison 1 - Sandra processor performance benchmarks Figure 1.

Results

In this maximum performance comparison, the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers outperformed all of the HP systems in raw processing power. The 12th generation Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers feature the latest Intel Xeon processor E3 and E5 product families, which provide a significant performance advantage over the AMD® based HP MicroServer and Business PC. In this comparison and the rest of this competitive analysis, the low performance of the HP Proliant MicroServer and HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business Desktop is exposed. The AMD Athlon II and Phenom II processors in these systems are typically used in desktop systems and are not server-class processors, as the considerable performance shortfall of this study shows.

Comparison 1: processor performance, part 2 SPECjbb2005 measures the processing performance of servers as they compute Java operations. The benchmark emulates a three-tier system, the most common type of server-side Java application today. The number of JVMs used for this benchmark was optimized for the number of logical processors present in each server. The optimal JVM count was chosen per configuration to give the best result for each system. Figure 2 shows the raw scores for each server measured in SPECjbb2005 bops (business operations per second).

9 7.09 8 8.43 41.34 35 38

65

120 92 105

263

182 136

157

386 340

254 294

735

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Dhrystone iSSE 4.2(GIPS)

Whetstone iSSE3(GFLOPS)

Aggregate ArithmeticPerformance (GOPS)

Processor Multi-Media(MPix/s)

Sandra Processor Peformance (Higher is Better)

HP Proliant MicroServer HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PCDell PowerEdge T110 II Dell PowerEdge T320Dell PowerEdge T420

The PowerEdge entry-level servers are the clear winner in all Sandra processor performance benchmarks.


8

Comparison 1 - processor performance – SPECjbb2005 benchmark Figure 2.

Figure 2 shows the same date as seen in Figure 1 only in a different format. It is normalized to better illustrate the performance advantage that the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers hold.

Results

The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers are again the clear leader in processor performance, this time measured by JVM operations per second. The HP Proliant MicroServer is outperformed by almost 8 times when compared to the PowerEdge T110 II.

SPECjbb2005 results listed by total SPECjbb2005 bops and SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM as required by SPEC fair usage guidelines (http://www.spec.org/fairuse.html#JBB2005:

• Dell PowerEdge T420 (2 chips, 16 cores, 32 threads) 1,179,173 SPECjbb2005 bops, 8 JVMs, 147,396 SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM

• Dell PowerEdge T320 (1 chip, 8 cores, 16 threads) 625,964 SPECjbb2005 bops, 4 JVMs, 156,491 SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM

• Dell PowerEdge T110 II (1 chip, 4 cores, 8 threads) 391,176 SPECjbb2005 bops, 2 JVMs, 195,598 SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM

1.0X

4.4X

7.9X

12.6X

23.7X

0.0 X 5.0 X 10.0 X 15.0 X 20.0 X 25.0 X

SPEC

jbb

2005

bop

s

Server Side Java Performance - SPECjbb2005 (Normalized)

Dell PowerEdge T420

Dell PowerEdge T320

Dell PowerEdge T110 II

HP Compaq 6005 Pro BusinessPC

http://www.spec.org/fairuse.html#JBB2005


9

• HP ProLiant MicroServer (1 chip, 2 cores, 2 threads) 49,690 SPECjbb2005 bops, 1 JVM, 49,690 SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM

• HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC (1 chip, 4 cores, 4 threads) 220,277 SPECjbb2005 bops, 2 JVMs, 110,138 SPECjbb2005 bops/JVM

Comparison 2: cryptographic bandwidth (security encryption) Comparison 2, shown in Figure 3, examines the capabilities of the servers at encoding/decoding secure transmissions as well as the hashing calculations performed to detect data corruption or tampering. These operations are critical to running a secure business environment and can cripple a system not equipped for this level of Enterprise operation.

Comparison 2 - SiSoftware Sandra cryptographic bandwidth (Gb/s) Figure 3.

Results As in Comparison 1, the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers have a significant advantage in raw processing performance. Due to the advanced Intel AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions) instruction set available in the new Intel Xeon E3 and E5 architecture of the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers, the performance advantage over the HP servers is even greater. The Dell PowerEdge servers outperformed both HP based platforms by between 4.6 times and 65 times. This comparison shows again that the older AMD Athlon II and Phenom II-based HP systems cannot keep up with the level of performance available in the Dell 12th generation PowerEdge entry-level servers. The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers are by far the best entry-level servers tested for data security and e-commerce applications in this study.

For more information on the new Intel AVX instruction set, please visit the following website: http://software.intel.com/en-us/avx/

0.12

0.58

2.68

4

7.81

0 GB /s 2 GB /s 4 GB /s 6 GB /s 8 GB /s

Sand

ra C

rypt

ogra

phic

Ban

dwid

th (

GB/

s -

Hig

her

is B

ette

r)

Sandra Cryptographic Bandwidth (GB/s - Higher is Better)

Dell PowerEdge T420

Dell PowerEdge T320



HP Proliant MicroServer

http://software.intel.com/en-us/avx/


10

Summary The results of Comparison 1 show that the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers have much more raw processing power than any of the HP systems in this study. The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers are the performance leaders in numerical integer, floating point, image processing, and server side Java calculations. The margin of victory was significant, ranging from 1.7 times up to 87 times.

Comparison 2 showed that the advanced AVX instructions featured in the Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers make them ideal servers for secure business transactions and e-commerce. The Dell PowerEdge entry-level servers offer between 4.6 times and 6.5 times more performance than the HP servers for encryption/decryption, and hashing calculations encryption/decryption, and hashing calculations.


11

Appendix A — Test methodology

SPECjbb2005

SPECjbb2005 is an industry standard benchmark created by the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC) to measure a server’s Server Side Java (SSJ) performance. SPECjbb2005 evaluates the performance of SSJ by emulating a three-tier client/server system (with emphasis on the middle tier). The benchmark exercises the implementations of the JVM (Java Virtual Machine), JIT (Just-In-Time) compiler, garbage collection, threads and some aspects of the operating system. It also measures the performance of processors, caches, memory hierarchy and the scalability of shared memory processors. For more information on SPECjbb2005, see http://www.spec.org/jbb2005/.

All results discussed in this competitive analysis are from “compliant runs” in SPEC terminology, which means that although they have not been submitted to SPEC for review, Dell is allowed to disclose them for the purpose of this study. All configuration details required to reproduce these results are listed in Appendices A, B, and C and all result files from the runs compared are included in Appendix D.

All servers were configured by installing a fresh copy of Microsoft® Windows Server®

2008 R2 (Service Pack 1). The only exception to this was the HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC. It only comes with Windows 7 Enterprise from the factory and does not offer a server operating system as an option. Due to this limitation, this system was installed with the client operating system offered on this system. The Lock Pages in Memory option was achieved by disabling UAC in the control panel, then setting Lock Pages in Memory to Enabled for Administrator. This configuration is the Maximum Performance configuration mentioned in Comparison 1, Table 1.

The latest driver and firmware update packages available to all servers were installed at the beginning of this study. Refer to Appendix B — Server hardware configuration information for details.

The Dell Solutions Performance Analysis Team ran SPECjbb2005 ten times per configuration across all four servers and chose the run with the highest SPECjbb2005 bops for each configuration to compare for this study.

SPECjbb2005 BIOS settings

SPECjbb2005 BIOS settings for each system Table 2.

BIOS SettingsSystem PowerEdge T420 PowerEdge T320 PowerEdge T110 II HP 6005 Pro Business PC HP Microserver

HW Prefetcher Disabled Disabled Disabled Not Available Not AvailableAdjacent Sector Prefetcher Disabled Disabled Disabled Not Available Not Available

DCU IP Prefetcher Disabled Disabled Disabled Not Available Not AvailableDCU Streamer Prefetcher Disabled Disabled Disabled Not Available Not Available

Virtualization Disabled Disabled Disabled Disabled DisabledC-States Enabled Enabled Enabled Enabled Enabled

Memory Frequency800MHz (Max proc will support)

1200MHz (Max proc will support)

1600MHz(Max proc will support)




12

SPECjbb2005 OS tuning

To improve Java performance, large pages were enabled by entering Control Panel Administrative Tools -> Local Security Policy -> Local Policies -> User Rights Assignment -> Lock Pages in Memory. An option was changed to add Administrator.

Operating System Power Management mode for all solutions was changed to Maximum performance and the Advanced Options was edited to reset the hard drive sleep time to 20 minutes.

SPECjbb2005 configuration

IBM® J9 Java Virtual Machine (JVM)1 was used for SPECjbb2005 testing as this JVM provided the best performance for SPECjbb2005 of any of the available choices at the time that the HP MicroServer and HP 6005 Pro Business PC data was gathered.

The bindings chosen were different for each system because of the differing core counts and number of JVMs used for each configuration. The following list details the affinity for each system’s JVMs to the total available number of logical processors.

• Dell PowerEdge T420 – start / affinity [0000000F, 000000F0, 00000F00, 0000F000, 000F0000, 00F00000, 0F000000, F0000000]

• Dell PowerEdge T320 – start / affinity [000F, 00F0, 0F00, F000]

• Dell PowerEdge T110 II - start /affinity [0F,F0]

• HP Proliant MicroServer - start /affinity [3]

• HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC - start /affinity [3,C]

SiSoftware Sandra

Sandra 2012 are industry standard benchmarks created by SiSoftware. These benchmarks were created to measure the performance of each subsystem in a computer. This data can be analyzed individually to investigate specific subsystem performance or as a whole to benchmark total system performance. This study chose a subset of the total metrics available, specifically those that would be relevant to small business server customers. Following is a list of each benchmark and a short description of what it measures:

• Aggregate Arithmetic Performance – measured in Giga Operations Per Second (GOPS), this metric is a rating derived from the Integer and Floating Point processor tests within Sandra.

• Dhrystone iSSE4.2 – measured in Giga Integer operations Per Second (GIPS), this test measures the capability of a processor to calculate integer-based operations. Examples of this are complex matrix multiplication and Monte Carlo simulations.

1 JVM build 2.4, J2RE 1.6.0 IBM® J9 2.4 Windows Server® 2008 amd64-64 jvmwa64 60sr5-20090519_35743


13

• Whetstone iSSE3 – measured in Giga FLoating point Operations Per Second (GFLOPS), this benchmark measures the floating-point computational performance of a system. This type of calculation is most common in graphic rendering and scientific analysis.

• Processor Multimedia – measured in Mega Pixels per Second (MP/s), the final Sandra processor test, this measures the calculation speed achieved when rendering a series of complex fractal images.

Cryptographic Bandwidth (Gb/s) – this is a specialized test that measures the total throughput of a system when computing the most common security encryption and decryption functions. Also included in this test are the file hashing calculations necessary to detect file corruption and tampering. For more information on SiSoftware Sandra, see http://www.sisoftware.net/.

All servers were configured by installing a fresh copy of Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 (Service Pack 1). The only exception to this was the HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC. It only comes with Windows 7 Enterprise from the factory and does not offer a server OS as an option. Due to this limitation, this system was installed with the client operating system offered on this system. The Lock Pages in Memory option was achieved by disabling UAC in the control panel, then setting Lock Pages in Memory to Enabled for Administrator. Also, the HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC only offers Windows 7 Enterprise from the factory, so this was the configuration tested. This configuration is the Maximum Performance configuration mentioned in Comparison 1, Table 1.

The latest driver and firmware update packages available to all servers were installed at the beginning of this study. Refer to Appendix B — Server hardware configuration information for details.

Sandra BIOS settings

The BIOS settings for the Sandra runs differed from the SPEC runs in that all hardware prefetchers were changed back to their default setting of enabled. Table 3 shows this configuration. The power plan for each system was selected as Maximum Performance in the BIOS to match the OS settings listed in this table.

Sandra BIOS settings for each system Table 3.

Sandra OS tuning

The optimal settings for Sandra are to set the OS power plan to Maximum performance and the Advanced Options edited to reset the hard drive sleep time to 20 minutes. No other special configuration of the operating system or the benchmark itself is required to set up and run Sandra. The option for running all Sandra tests was selected and the benchmark executed the chosen script without any further user interaction.

BIOS Settings - Sandra 2012System PowerEdge T420 PowerEdge T320 PowerEdge T110 II HP 6005 Pro Business PC HP Microserver

HW Prefetcher Enabled Enabled Enabled Not Available Not AvailableAdjacent Sector Prefetcher Enabled Enabled Enabled Not Available Not Available

DCU IP Prefetcher Enabled Enabled Enabled Not Available Not AvailableDCU Streamer Prefetcher Enabled Enabled Enabled Not Available Not Available

Virtualization Disabled Disabled Disabled Disabled DisabledC-States Enabled Enabled Enabled Enabled Enabled



Memory Frequency1600MHz(Max proc will support)




14

Appendix B — Server hardware configuration information

Server hardware configuration information Table 4.

Dell PowerEdge

T420

Dell PowerEdge T320


HP ProLiant MicroServer

HP Compaq 6005 Pro

Business PC

Memory Modules

Total RAM in system (GB) 96 48 16 8 8

Vendor and model number

Hynix HMT31GR7BFR4

C-PB

Hynix HMT31GR7BFR4C-

PB

Hynix HMT41GU7MFR8

C-PB

Hynix GMT251U7BFR8

A

Samsung M391B5273CH0

-YH9

Type PC3-12800R-11 PC3-12800R-11 PC3-12800E-11-11 PC3L-10600E PC3L-10600E

Speed (MHz) 1600 1600 1600 1333 1333

Speed in system as tested 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 800 MHz 1200 MHz

Timing/latency CAS 11 CAS 11 CAS 11 CAS 9 CAS 9

Number of RAM modules 12 x 8 GB 6 x 8 GB 2 x 8 GB 2 x 4 GB 2 x 4 GB

Rank organization Dual Rank x 4 Dual Rank x 4 Dual Rank x 8 Dual Rank x 8 Dual Rank x 8

Hard Disk


Seagate ST9500620SS

Samsung HE253GJ

Western Digital WD250ABYS

Seagate ST3500418AS

Seagate ST3500418AS

Number of disks in system 1 1 1 4 2

Size (GB) 500 250 250GB 250 500

RPM 7.2K 7.2K 7.2k 7.2K 7.2K

Type SAS 6Gbps SATA SATA SATA 3 Gbps SATA 3 Gbps

RAID Type non-RAID non-RAID non-RAID RAID 0 RAID 1

Controller H310 PERC S110 (integrated)

None - Cabled Direct

Attach

Embedded AMD Controller

AMD (Xpert) RAID

Controller Embedded


15

Dell PowerEdge T420

Dell PowerEdge T320


HP ProLiant MicroServer


Operating System

Name

Microsoft Windows Server

2008 R2 Enterprise SP1






Foundations 2008 R2

Enterprise SP1

Microsoft Windows 7 Enterprise

File system NTFS NTFS NTFS NTFS NTFS

Language English English English English English

Network Adapter


Broadcom®

BCM5720 NetXtreme® II

Broadcom®

BCM5720 NetXtreme® II

Broadcom® BCM5772

NetXtreme® II

Broadcom® NC107i

NetXtreme®

Broadcom® BCM5761

NetXtreme®

Type Integrated Integrated Integrated Integrated Integrated


16

Appendix C — Server firmware and drivers

Server firmware and drivers Table 5.

Driver/Firmware Versions

Dell PowerEdge T420

Dell PowerEdge T320

Dell PowerEdge

T110 II

HP ProLiant Microserver

HP Compaq 6005 Pro

Business PC

System BIOS 1.0.1 1.0.1 2.0.5 2011.01.17 (A)

(Released 2/28/2011)

1.12 Rev. A (Release 4/1/

2011)

Chipset Driver 9.2.3.1023 9.2.3.1023 9.2.0.10.21 8.73.4 (8 Sep 2010) 1.3.0.49

Video Driver 2.4.1.0 2.4.1.0 1.1.3.0 OS Native 4.1.11.1332

Integrated Management Controller Firmware

1.20.20 build 24 1.20.20 build 24 1.85.02 No iLO present No iLO present

Management Controller Driver Not installed Not installed Not installed N/A N/A


17

Appendix D — Comparison 1 and 2 detailed results For each comparison, the first page of the result files for each benchmark is shown. The SPECjbb2005 benchmark contains results files which are generated with graphic and tabular results for each server. Sandra only provides a text output file, so this will not be included in this section. Full Sandra, and SPECjbb2005 results files for each server are attached to this document for reference.

Comparison 1: SPECjbb2005 results

Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T110 II Figure 4.


18

Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T420 Figure 5.


19

Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for Dell PowerEdge T320 Figure 6.


20

Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for HP Proliant MicroServer Figure 7.


21

Comparison 1 — SPECjbb2005 results for HP Compaq 6005 Pro Business PC Figure 8.

Comparison 2: Sandra cryptographic bandwidth results

The results for Sandra are output into text format, there are no graphical representations of the data. There are no visuals that can be shown for this section of the study.

Dell PowerEdge 12th Generation Entry-Level Tower...

Documents

Transcript of Dell PowerEdge 12th Generation Entry-Level Tower...