[desktop-discuss] Offering x64 based (host && guest) SunPCI board for Solaris x86/x64 as (affordable) product ever explored? _/_ WAS: OS's in VM

[Garrett D'Amore]

On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 21:14 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 29/08/2007, Garrett D'Amore <garrett at damore.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 20:16 -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > > On 29/08/2007, Martin Bochnig <mb1x at gmx.com> wrote:
> > > > Martin Bochnig wrote:
> > > > > If you would still be using a SPARC as primary platform (i.e. sb2k),
> > > > > then you all could easily benefit from SunPCiIIIpro, which offers you a
> > > > > usable solution (speed).
> > > > > You can even boot MartUX_x86 inside it (with a special grub floppy that
> > > > > I never uploaded so far / then netboot SPARC's local dvd-rom [special
> > > > > SunPCi-miniroot on MartUX DVD]).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > http://www.sun.com/desktop/products/sunpcipro/
> > > > (appears to be almost EOL'ed now, probably due to having been overpriced
> > > > at $800)
> > > >
> > > > Has such a thing ever been considered for x86 hosts?
> > > > Just opening up the old sparc drivers/application would be an excellent
> > > > start ...
> > > > I'm sure Sun didn't have to pay a dime for someone porting the
> > > > traditional SUNWspci3 to x86.
> > > > Afterwards Sun could bring out an Opteron based card (or rather Turion64
> > > > Mobile or similar) at, say, $399.
> > > > I'm sure there is a demand by desktop customers, to some extent.
> > > > You could also offer such a thing for host OS's other than Solaris.
> > > >
> > > > Or is low level virtualisation (e.g. Xen) the exclusive road to go
> > > > nowadays, especially in terms of server-sales?
> > > > Maybe it is a few years too late now.
> > >
> > > I'd love to see the reverse product. SPARC-on-a-card for my x86 ;)
> > >
> >
> >
> > Both devices have a substantial hurdle to overcome, which is the 25W
> > power budget for PCI.  For PCIe the budget is higher, but IIRC its only
> > on the order of 75W.
> >
> > You might have to some kind of creative power management to make it
> > work.
> 
> Why wouldn't the solution that seems to work for video card
> manufacturers work? i.e. plug a molex connector into it.

That might work.  (Though I must say I hate the trend by the video
manufacturers to yank all available wattage... but that's another rant.)

One concern though, is even those molex connectors have a limit.  Apart
from the extra PCIe connectors (which I thought is where the 75W came
from, but I migth be wrong), I don't know what the maximum power draw
is.  I know that I wouldn't like to have another 300W drawing....

Its true generally that modern processors have got more efficient.  But
it is also true that pretty much all of the modern x64 processors are
*still* pulling huge amounts of power.  They just *do more* with it.
(With the exception of the ULV Core Solo parts, which might work out.)

	-- Garrett