ARM based Cloud Cluster Running Google App Engine

Using a comment from the site one can calculate that the cluster gets a coremark score of 34K vs the xeon's 23K(leaving aside the SD card issue).<p>comment:<p>""" I went to Coremark website and compared the Coremark 1.0 scores of OMAP4430 running 2 forks and Intel Xeon E5405 (Quad Core @ 2 GHz) running 4 threads. OMAP 4 gets 5742.20 and Xeon E5405 gets 23579. (See screenshot below)<p><a href="http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/benchmark_coremark_1.0_xeon_e5405_vs_TI_OMAP4430SDP.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnx-software.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/bench...</a><p>But I still think the Xeon server would probably perform (much) better than the pandaboard cluster during “real” tests because of the storage used in the pandaboards (SD Card or external USB storage). """

Looks very cool. But what is a "cloud cluster"? It's evidently not a cluster in the cloud as it's a bit of physical hardware they are using. I guess it could be a cluster that could be used as part of a cloud, but then isn't that the same as saying it's a "cluster"?

I'm working to build a cluster of pandaboards. This week I've taken delivery of a powersupply that will power several boards from a single wall-socket.<p>Something I've been stuck on - how to create mess-free casing.<p>The least-bad idea I've had so far is to make a four-leg rack, strap the boards and cables to chipboard, lay them in the rack, and then fold an asian-style room partition around it. This won't keep out dust and spiders though. Any advice?

"...Norisuna had a comparison table that showed the Pandaboard cloud (OMAP4 @ 1GHz – 12 Cores) uses 4x times space and 5x less power (50W vs. 257 W) than a Xeon 1.8GHz Quad Core server with about the same amount of processing power and memory (6GB vs. 8GB)...."<p>any data to back up that claim? Is that just raw MHz or real benchmarks?