1U Supermicro Server 6x 10GBE RJ45 X10SLH-LN6TF LGA 1150 H3 X10SLH-N6-ST031

tjk

Active Member
Mar 3, 2013
292
54
28
www.servercentral.com
Anyone get these working with SATA HDD's in raid/non raid mode? Trying latest Debian and it won't see the controller or drives. Not sure if I'm missing something or not.
 

EasyRhino

Active Member
Aug 6, 2019
123
52
28
I was able to use a Sata SSD and a Sata HDD in basic ahci mode with freebsd and proxmox and esxi recognizing... No special effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjk

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
It's a micro-ATX form factor so I suspect it would. Better check to see if there's a I/O shield available for it if one is not included.
I measure 9.6" wide; however, 12" deep.

IIRC, mATX is 9.6 x 9.6.

So, it would fit width-wise, like slots. However, you'll need a deep deep chassis.

Humm, I have a NIB Supermicro mATX case in the garage. I wonder how deep of a mobo it would allow.

EDIT:
  • The memory slots comes all the way forward to 11", as measured from the rear of the board.
  • The CPU socket/heatsink comes all the way forward to 10", as measured from the rear of the board.
  • Not to mention a lot of the connectors are at the very front of the board, needing clearance.
So, I doubt it would fit in any mATX chassis as that's usually the area for drive bays, radiators, fans, etc.

Let's take the Supermicro CSE-731i-300B: It would fit if I removed the cage that holds all 4 x 3.5" drive bays as the drive cage would hit the memory/slots and CPU cooler/socket (but who would want to do that?).

However, there are no stand-off to mount the front of the board in that area.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sogndal94

Fritz

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2015
2,423
645
113
67
I measure 9.5" wide; however, 12" deep.

IIRC, mATX is 9.5 x 9.5.

So, it would fit width-wise, like slots. However, you'll need a deep deep chassis.

Humm, I have a NIB Supermicro mATX case in the garage. I wonder how deep of a mobo it would allow.

EDIT:
  • The memory slots comes all the way forward to 11", as measured from the rear of the board.
  • The CPU socket/heatsink comes all the way forward to 10", as measured from the rear of the board.
  • Not to mention a lot of the connectors are at the very front of the board, needing clearance.
So, I doubt it would fit in any mATX chassis as that's usually the area for drive bays, radiators, fans, etc.

Let's take the Supermicro CSE-731i-300B: It would fit if I removed the cage that holds all 4 x 3.5" drive bays as the drive cage would hit the memory/slots and CPU cooler/socket (but who would want to do that?).

However, there are no stand-off to mount the front of the board in that area.
Then it shouldn't be advertised as M-ATX, it should be Proprietary.


Screenshot from 2021-06-29 11-57-32.png
 

Attachments

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
Then it shouldn't be advertised as M-ATX, it should be Proprietary.


View attachment 19164
That's not the same motherboard. It doesn't have 3x 45nm power-hungry large heatsinked Intel X550 10GBaseT chips.

I don't think SM advertises this mobo anywhere, not on their public site.

However, in their manual they state it's an ATX - which is wrong:

Dimensions ATX form factor (9.6" x 12") (243.84 mm x 304.8 mm)
Source: https://drunkencat.net/misc/X10SLH-LN6TF.pdf

So, I guess you can call it... Extended mATX or E-mATX, if there was such a thing. Lol. Since that's how other ATX boards get away with various depths beyond the ATX standard.
 
Last edited:

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
Sorry, didn't explain.

They are wrong for calling it an ATX board.
  • MicroATX Spec: 9.6" x 9.6" square
  • ATX Standard: 12" (width) x 9.6" (depth)
  • X10SLH-LN6TF: 9.6" (width) x 12" (depth)
They basically just rotated the ATX spec, 90°.

meaning technically, this board does not fit Micro-ATX nor ATX chassis !!!

So basically: Your chassis needs to be able to support E-ATX or Extended ATX boards for a care-free plug-play setup.

E-ATX basically means: 9.6" width, and "up-to" 13.68" depth. Then there are boards that go beyond the 9.6" width called EE-ATX. There are no additional standoffs IIRC.

Though, I have modified quite a few ATX-only chassis to fit E-ATX in my days.
 
Last edited:

Fritz

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2015
2,423
645
113
67
Glad I avoided this weirdo. Reminds me there is some strange HW out there that will cause you grief. Much of it finds itself on this forum. :p
 

EasyRhino

Active Member
Aug 6, 2019
123
52
28
I was able to fit it in am old htpc case with unusually large front clearance. See post #188

There may be other cases like that. I think there was a cooleraster matx candidate.... But only one of their cases.
 

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
Hooked up my age-old Kill-a-Watt. Here's some accurate numbers for everyone, since I never trust these Supermicro PDCs.

Setup:
  • Supermicro 1U Chassis that the X19SLH-LN6TF comes in, stock PWS-341P-1H 340W PSU
  • E3-1270V3, passive heatsink, 32 GB DDR3-1600Mhz
  • Standard 4 counter-routing fans (the two dummies are empty, as usual for this chassis)
  • 79F ambient temp
  • No HDDs, no SATADOM, No PCIe card in Riser (Riser present though)
  • No RJ45 cables connected, not even IPMI
  • Supermicro TPM Module installed
  • BIOS Reset to Optimum Defaults (default power savings settings)
  • BMC Enabled
  • Dell 1000W rack UPS, load output stable @ 115 VAC
The X540 nics were hardware disable/powered-off using the JPL1/JPL2/JPL3 jumpers during those test runs.

I chose Ubuntu installer as the default Linux kernel has reasonable C state power savings where as FreeBSD (pfSense) does not out of the box (need a package). However, they could be optimized further on both OS.

IPMI Plugged in, system powered off:
  • Spikes to 25 W (BMC booting?)
  • 10.0 W idle
  • 13 W with Link/Cable
All 3 x X540 NICs enabled:
  • First boot/waiting on BMC: 75.8 W
  • BIOS Tests: 93.4 W
  • Post-Boot, Fans Calm Down, idle Built-in EFI Shell: 72.1 W (dips to 66.7 W at times) for 5 minutes
  • Boot to Ubuntu 21.04 Installer: 64.1 W - 71 W for 5 minutes
Just 1 x X540 NIC enabled:
  • First boot/waiting on BMC: 70.8
  • BIOS Tests: 89.9 W
  • Post-Boot, Fans Calm Down, idle Built-in EFI Shell: 65.4 W (dips to 62.9 W at times) for 5 minutes
  • Boot to Ubuntu 21.04 Installer: 59.9 W - 62.9 W for 5 minutes
All 3 x X540 NICs disabled:
  • First boot/waiting on BMC: 68.2 W
  • BIOS Tests: 86.7 W
  • Post-Boot, Fans Calm Down, idle Built-in EFI Shell: 61.2 W (dips to 60.5 W at times) for 5 minutes
  • Boot to Ubuntu 21.04 Installer: 57.0 W - 60.5 W for 5 minutes
There were various spikes, like waiting on the BMC it spikes 3-5W higher at times. Also, booting all 3 x X540 nics hit over 105 W sometimes during Ubuntu's boot sequence.

Correction: Updated BMC idle with power off, as with a link it idles at 13 W all the time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bert and Marsh

Bert

Active Member
Mar 31, 2018
369
148
43
42
Looks like power usage is high even when NICs are disabled. I remember this was also reported before. Can we assume that disabling NICs with jumper does not power them down?
 

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
Looks like power usage is high even when NICs are disabled. I remember this was also reported before. Can we assume that disabling NICs with jumper does not power them down?
It's not that high.

The test results above show where power drops about ~3-4 Watts, per NIC, that you disable via the jumpers.
  • 71 W - All 3 NICs enabled
  • 63 W - Only 1 NIC enabled
  • 60 W - No NICs enabled
So, if you also take the 13 W for the BMC away, (and the 2W from the PDU/PSU always-on state of Supermicro/server systems), you are left with a system that would idle around 45 W - pretty much the exact same as a desktop version of the CPU series with 4 sticks of ram.

All in all, this is much more power efficient than sticking X540 PCIe cards in a board - as each PCIe Intel X540 would pull around 7-11W due to the onboard power regulators (which you get for free on the board already, with onboard components).

It's not the board or NICs that are power hungry, it's the BMC and Supermicro (and most others) PSU and PDUs in server chassis.

If you want lower power compared to a desktop, then disable BMC, connect it to a KVM (that uses power itself), and use a normal PSU.

If you want BMC, then you'll need to pay for it in watts. If you want the pretty 1U supermicro chassis, you'll need to pay for it in watts.

---

Just to add onto that, my SC846 with a single X10 LGA2011-3 V3 CPU, quad mem ddr4 sticks, 1 x SSD - idles at 68 W with a single PSU/PDU and BMC. Disabling BMC (12 Watts) and using a straight ATX Platinum PSU, I see about 52 W. However, once you connect the backplane (9 Watts) and LSI9211-8i (11 Watts), now you are at 84 W with the SM PSU/PDU + BMC. That's before HDDs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: abq, Bert and Fritz

GhettoSuperstar

New Member
Mar 12, 2020
3
0
1
I have PF Sense Ver 2.5.2 installed. I was able to unlock the BIOS. I used a bios on here that help facilitate unlocking the BIOS.
With my Kill-a-Watt, It average 60watts. This fits fine in a Dell Vostro 200 case. You just have to modify the case by removing drive cages and modding the backplate area. CPU usage never goes above 5%. I also put 3 Noctua 40x20mm fans on the x540 heatsinks and I put one 40x20mm fan on the Mellanox ConnectX-3 controller.

Setup:
  • Dell Vostro 200 case, with SilverStone Technology 300 Watt TFX PSU 80 Plus Bronze SST-TX300-USA
  • Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1265L v3 @ 2.50GHz , passive heat-sink, with a 120mm fan on top
  • 8 GB DDR3-1600Mhz Ballistix (4GBx2)
  • IBM Mellanox ConnectX-3 VPI IB/E controller with 10Gbit QSFP Fiber Connection
  • 42C core temp
  • 1 240gb SSD SATA drive
  • BMC Enabled
  • 4 Noctua NF-A4x20 PWM, Premium Quiet Fan
 

penguinslovebananas

New Member
Sep 25, 2020
3
0
1
I noticed reading through the forum that someone updated the bmc firmware with the one posted for the x10slh-f board on supermicro's site. Have anyone tested this and found it safe to do so. If you need them my specs are:

pfSense 2.5.2
E3-1230v3
4x - samsung 8gb pc3l-12800 ecc udimm
intel i350-t4 quad port gig nic
silicom i350am2 six port gig nic
2x - 64gb supermicro satadom boot drive (RAID 1)

I appreciate you taking the time to read my message and provide help.
 

eduncan911

The New James Dean
Jul 27, 2015
302
164
43
eduncan911.com
I noticed reading through the forum that someone updated the bmc firmware with the one posted for the x10slh-f board on supermicro's site. Have anyone tested this and found it safe to do so. If you need them my specs are:

pfSense 2.5.2
E3-1230v3
4x - samsung 8gb pc3l-12800 ecc udimm
intel i350-t4 quad port gig nic
silicom i350am2 six port gig nic
2x - 64gb supermicro satadom boot drive (RAID 1)

I appreciate you taking the time to read my message and provide help.
IMO, the retail version of the X10SLH-F does not come with the 3x Intel X540-T2 10GBaseT NICs - and therefore no way to control (initialize?) them.

The custom BIOS we have on the X10SLH-LN6TF does have the BIOS controls for them.
 

penguinslovebananas

New Member
Sep 25, 2020
3
0
1
IMO, the retail version of the X10SLH-F does not come with the 3x Intel X540-T2 10GBaseT NICs - and therefore no way to control (initialize?) them.

The custom BIOS we have on the X10SLH-LN6TF does have the BIOS controls for them.
I have the bios, I was looking at updating the BMC firmware with the one on the x10slh-f page