Facebook goes ARM with Calxeda
semiaccurate.com
semiaccurate.com
I think Nvidia might target Project Denver for servers, too, and that's also a custom ARMv8 chip, but I don't think it will be ready until the 2nd half of 2014 (even though they initially promised late 2013). They might be waiting on the Maxwell GPU architecture to be ready.
Throughput is not really relevant. Throughput per unit power is better. ARM manufacturers have been optimizing for power consumption and unit cost for a long time, Intel has been optimizing for throughput and speed for a long time. Both sides are aiming for the same target, from different angles. A "low power" Xeon might be 40W for four cores, but the typical range is 60W - 140W. Calxeda sells a sixteen-core, 20W ARM board. By these numbers, Xeon needs to have 8x throughput of the ARM to beat it in throughput per watt.
Now, this is not entirely unreasonable. I've done benchmarking of my Core i5 against my Atom on an audio sample rate conversion library I wrote, and the Core i5 has 6-7x the throughput of the Atom. So, I would believe you if you said that a Xeon core is more than 8x as fast as an ARM core, and therefore the throughput per watt is better. This is all guessing, based on one benchmark I did for a library I wrote. I'm sure that Facebook has done some experiments with the applications they'll actually be running on the ARM.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that these ARM computers will be centered around specialized hardware, Calxeda's website only mentions general-purpose hardware built around ARM cores.
I can't work out yet if there is a standard way of attaching RAM as well I don;t think so (yet).
It has taken an open source project to make blade servers standardised by the look of it, should make the whole ecosystem much cheaper than the proprietary systems.
It is not actually clear if Facebook has committed to ARM, although it would not surprise me if they use some. But they have the option.
Although this project is vaguely similar to blades, it isn't hot-swap, it can't hold 2S/4S servers, and it's not clear how I/O consolidation will work. So it's pretty different from existing blades.
[1] http://perspectives.mvdirona.com/2012/12/11/MicroserverMarke...
[2] http://www.quantaqct.com/en/01_product/02_detail.php?mid=27&...
Virtualization is "leaky", there are esoteric attacks against other guests on the same host that allow attackers to obtain encryption keys. Last time I checked, the mitigation strategy was to move to dedicated hardware.
I doubt dedicated microservers will be competetive with VPS for a while yet because you can't oversell them.
But the "hard part" is not having the HW, but keeping it online 24/7. Geez, I don't even have DSL at home (long story)
With linode and others I can reinstall at the click of a button, I get a dedicated IP, etc
It may be easy depending on your situation, still, VPSs seems to have more advantages.
https://www.ovh.co.uk/dedicated_servers/kimsufi.xml
Hosted in the USA or France, prices from £8.99 a month ($12?) for an Atom server with 2GB of RAM.