All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Robert G. Brown" <rgb@phy.duke.edu>
To: ultralinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Ultra AXmp
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 16:56:42 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ultrasparc-90222358531032@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ultrasparc-90222358531013@msgid-missing>

On Mon, 13 Jul 1998, Matthew Jacob wrote:

> I think we're all beginning to talk about different things. I believe
> you can build a very reasonable 2 (to maybe 4-way SMP with off the shelf
> Intel parts- good both for CPU/thread performance as well as the
> attachment of a couple PCI busses. That'll not give you a balanced system,
> but a *better* balanced system than a workstation with a single bus.
> 
> When you get into bigger than this, that's when, as you say, it
> gets very expensive. And single SCSI disks *are* cheap, but the
> infrastructure for 100 of them gets quite expensive.

Total agreement.  Although I don't believe that >>most<< 4-processor
system clients are looking for systems that support a terabyte or so of
online, fast hard disk.  Or rather, we'd all probably love to have
one, if somebody else will pay for it...:-)

> > I thought the real claim to fame of all of Sun's multiprocessing
> > systems (and the SP2, and the Power Challenge, and the...) has always
> > been their really fast/expensive IPC bus, not their interface to
> > peripherals.
> 
> wrt Sun: Surely you're kidding (unless you're referring only to the EXXXK
> series).

Half kidding, maybe.  Even the old Sparc 1000 and 2000 systems had
decent IPC/memory busses compared to, well, at the time there wasn't
much to compare to but even now to a dual PPro, and if you could
afford them gave you quite a few processors on a native IPC bus
(definitely better than network IPC's).  I couldn't say what the
current profile of Sun vs IBM vs SGI multiprocessor systems is,
though, because every time I've looked at it in the the past it has
been absurdly far from commodity Intel boxes (in either dual or quad
packaging) in price/performance for our task mix.  So I've stopped
looking, except passively by following posts here and elsewhere.

At $20K for a fully equipped quad system, it sounds like Sun has made
major strides in price performance, but I'm afraid that it is still a
matter of reducing Intel's price/performance advantage for our task
mix from 3 to 2.

   rgb

Robert G. Brown	                       http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/
Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305
Durham, N.C. 27708-0305
Phone: 1-919-660-2567  Fax: 919-660-2525     email:rgb@phy.duke.edu

  parent reply	other threads:[~1998-07-13 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1998-07-11 18:36 Ultra AXmp Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-12  1:56 ` David S. Miller
1998-07-12  2:21 ` Matthew Jacob
1998-07-12  2:29 ` David S. Miller
1998-07-12  5:02 ` Matthew Jacob
1998-07-12 12:54 ` Douglas Eadline
1998-07-12 23:59 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-13  6:27 ` Qiru Zhou
1998-07-13  6:38 ` David S. Miller
1998-07-13 10:40 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-13 12:09 ` Xavier Beaudouin
1998-07-13 13:59 ` Robert G. Brown
1998-07-13 14:29 ` Robert HYATT
1998-07-13 14:54 ` Matthew Jacob
1998-07-13 14:56 ` Matthew Jacob
1998-07-13 14:59 ` Matti Aarnio
1998-07-13 15:24 ` Robert HYATT
1998-07-13 15:38 ` Robert HYATT
1998-07-13 16:56 ` Robert G. Brown [this message]
1998-07-13 17:04 ` Robert G. Brown
1998-07-13 17:13 ` Lawrence D. Lopez
1998-07-13 17:26 ` Mike
1998-07-14  1:44 ` Shannon
1998-07-14  7:00 ` David S. Miller
1998-07-14 18:07 ` Douglas Eadline
1998-07-14 23:23 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-15  3:31 ` Dave Wreski
1998-07-15  8:07 ` Ward Deng
1998-07-15 11:14 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-15 11:27 ` David S. Miller
1998-07-15 15:54 ` Robert G. Brown
1998-07-15 17:11 ` Robert G. Brown
1998-07-15 23:22 ` Luis Ponce de Leao
1998-07-21 23:29 ` Ward Deng
1998-07-25 23:34 ` Ward Deng
1998-07-26  0:02 ` Ward Fenton
1998-07-26  0:45 ` Rich Martin
1998-07-26  3:34 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-26  4:00 ` Ward Deng
1998-07-26  4:29 ` Ward Deng
1998-07-26 12:29 ` Bob Drzyzgula
1998-07-26 13:57 ` Douglas Eadline

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=marc-linux-ultrasparc-90222358531032@msgid-missing \
    --to=rgb@phy.duke.edu \
    --cc=ultralinux@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.