why 3000 series CPU core higher than 5000 series?

[batmunkh_unubuk]

Please see below picture. why 3000 series CPU core higher than 5000 series? who can explain it?

[AlekseiShelepov]

Check Point Appliance Hardware (Lachmann List, 28 Feb 2017) :

3200 - 1x Intel Atom C2558, 2.40GHz (Quad-Core)

5200 - 1x Intel Celeron G1820, 2.70GHz (Dual-Core)

5400 - 1x Intel Pentium G3420, 3.20GHz (Dual Core)

Comparison of these three: Intel® Product Specification Comparison 

I wouldn't say that Intel Atom is better (more powerful) CPU than Intel Celeron or Pentium, just the number of cores is bigger in this case. But there is also a difference in terms of form factor, placement of appliances, cooling, LOM card, RAM options, etc., which could be important for some customers.

[Kaspars_Zibarts]

We are running 5900 in few places and they have 16... So yes you have to read carefully between lines when comparing two appliances

[AlekseiShelepov]

Could you run cat /proc/cpuinfo on them please? To see what exactly CPU is installed in there. It should be with 8 physical cores then.

5900 appliances are quite powerful compared to other 5000 series, almost like 15400 (based on SPU). So it could be a tough choice between 15400 and 5900 sometimes - 1 unit of space in a rack and a several thousands of dollars of difference  

[Kaspars_Zibarts]

Indeed 8 physical cores: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz. I have sent the output to Lachmann btw a while ago.

They are quite mighty boxes for the size - can't agree more. Not cheap but we are planning to have them in those sites for long time

[Ralf_Wuestling]

As I did a comparison of 15400 vs. 5900 for a customer some days ago.
The performance improvement of the 15400 is higher then the price difference to the 5900. In addition it will offer much more expandability.
However as they are pretty close:
If rackspace is more important for you as expandibility choose 5900. (i.E. if you run many gateways for customers in one datacenter non virtualized)

If you aren't concerned about Rackspace i would choose the 15400.

[Kaspars_Zibarts]

Percentage wise, what was the difference in your tests?  looking at SPUs there isn't that much difference (2400 vs 2600)

[Ralf_Wuestling]

The listprices are also very close.
It was 8,3% for a 6,8% higher listprice. As stated above the additional unit vs. the possiblity to expand more memory or accelerator cards in the future might count more in most cases.

[batmunkh_unubuk]

thank you

[Timothy_Hall]

You can't really compare just the number of cores in different processor architectures (i.e. Celeron vs. Atom) and draw meaningful conclusions about how they will perform against each other without comparing other specs as well.  Atom has four cores but each individual core will not be nearly as fast as one of the cores on a Celeron. The Atom architecture is ultra-low-voltage which saves power but has reduced performance; a single Atom core is about half the speed of a single Pentium M core.

Also notice that the VPN throughput is actually higher on the 3100/3200 vs. the 5100/5200, this is because the 3100/3200 supports the AES-NI processor extensions whereas the 5100/5200 models do not.  AES-NI support resumes with the 5600 model and higher, except for the Power-1 9000/11000 series and 12200.  The 5800 and higher (except for the Power-1 9000/11000 series and 12200) also support SMT/Hyperthreading.

--
Second Edition of my "Max Power" Firewall Book
Now Available at http://www.maxpowerfirewalls.com