1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Can Sun beat this?

Discussion in 'Sun Hardware' started by Godzilla, Sep 1, 2003.

  1. Godzilla

    Godzilla Guest

    Godzilla, Sep 1, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Godzilla

    Mark Guest

    Yep, there are no actual speed performance specs in the above link!
     
    Mark, Sep 1, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Godzilla

    Scott Howard Guest

    Similar spec, or similar levels of FUD?

    Starting in the very first line we have "PowerPC G5, world's first 64-bit
    desktop processor"

    What the hell is a "desktop processor"? Last I looked Sun has had 64 bit
    processors in desktop machines for about 8-9 years now, and in fact Sun
    don't sell a single machine (desktop or otherwise) which isn't 64 bit,
    and havent done so for 5 years now.

    It then goes on to rattle about 32/64 bit compatibility. Again something
    Sun has been doing for many years.

    After that I got bored with the FUD and stopped reading.

    And this is what they consider revolutionary? Interesting...

    Scott.
     
    Scott Howard, Sep 2, 2003
    #3
  4. Actually, it does: LX50, VX60x, VX65x ... all Intel based. OK, these are
    sold as "entry level servers" but I see no reason why they can't be used as
    desktops.

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Sep 2, 2003
    #4
  5. Godzilla

    Chris Morgan Guest

    My view is : No, Sun cannot compete with the Powermac G5 considering
    the price is more like the Blade 150 and the performance more like the
    Blade 2000

    Chris
    --
    Chris Morgan
    "Post posting of policy changes by the boss will result in
    real rule revisions that are irreversible"

    - anonymous correspondent
     
    Chris Morgan, Sep 2, 2003
    #5
  6. Godzilla

    Rich Teer Guest

    Only if they cone with free earplugs! :)

    --
    Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

    President,
    Rite Online Inc.

    Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
    URL: http://www.rite-online.net
     
    Rich Teer, Sep 2, 2003
    #6
  7. Or you can put them in your boiler room with the rest of the machines :)

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Sep 2, 2003
    #7
  8. Godzilla

    Rich Teer Guest

    You're absolutely correct on both counts (I hope Sun's
    lawyers send Apple a note to that effect). But consider
    this (bear in mind that I'm writing this as a true blue,
    err, purple, Sun evagelist and supporter): a dual 2 GHz
    Power Mac G5 starts at $3000.

    The SPEC int score for that machine is 800, compared to
    the 1.2 GHz US-III score of 722. Yes, the US-III achieves
    more per MHz than the G5*, but a dual 1.2 GHz Sun Blade 2000
    (the "Large" one) is $14000. Even taking into account the
    SB 2000 comes with 2 GB of RAM, compared with the G5's
    paltry 512 MB, that's still a huge price difference. (The
    starting price of a single 1.2 GHz SB 2000 with 1 GB of RAM
    is $10000, and the entry level 900 MHz version is $$7600.)

    * Assuming a linear scale, a 2 GHz US-III should be able
    to get a SPEC int score of 1200!

    To get closer to Apple's $3000 figure, we need to look at
    the SB 150. I'll ignore the entry level 550 MHz version
    at $1400, and look at the 650 MHz models (the fastest
    currently offered). $2000 will get you a 650 MHz processor
    (SPEC int 246) with 256 MB of RAM, and $3400 will get you
    the same CPU, with 512 MB of RAM and an upgraded frame buffer.
    The latter is probably somewhat comparable to the G5 in terms
    of features, but has about ONE THIRD of the SPEC int performance.
    The tech specs aren't (that) revolutionary. But the
    price/performance should give Sun food for thought.

    Sun needs to start shipping workstations with much better
    price/performance, or they'll be in even deeper trouble.
    If the US-IIIi workstations offer the same price/performance,
    then all is not lost. But for some reason, they haven't
    been announced yet. :-(

    --
    Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

    President,
    Rite Online Inc.

    Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
    URL: http://www.rite-online.net
     
    Rich Teer, Sep 2, 2003
    #8
  9. A Blade 2000, dual 2GHz USparc IV with 4GB DDR-RAM and a nice 3dlabs
    framebuffer, all for ca. $4000 would be nice :)))

    Greetz from Germany
    Daniel
     
    Daniel C. Kreuzer, Sep 2, 2003
    #9
  10. On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 18:51:10 GMT,
    Rich Teer <>, in

    +> But consider
    +> this (bear in mind that I'm writing this as a true blue,
    +> err, purple, Sun evagelist and supporter): a dual 2 GHz
    +> Power Mac G5 starts at $3000.
    +>
    +> The SPEC int score for that machine is 800, compared to
    +> the 1.2 GHz US-III score of 722. Yes, the US-III achieves
    +> more per MHz than the G5*, but a dual 1.2 GHz Sun Blade 2000
    +> (the "Large" one) is $14000. Even taking into account the
    +> SB 2000 comes with 2 GB of RAM, compared with the G5's
    +> paltry 512 MB, that's still a huge price difference. (The
    +> starting price of a single 1.2 GHz SB 2000 with 1 GB of RAM
    +> is $10000, and the entry level 900 MHz version is $$7600.)

    When Apple put the G5's up on their "configure and order" web site, I
    went and maxed out a dual G5. Price? a hair under US$14K. What does
    that get you? dual cpu's, 8GB memory, *two* 23" LCD monitors,
    DVD+R/CD-RW, 500GB (2x250 SATA drives), a fibre channel card, and a
    5.1 THX speaker set.

    +> Sun needs to start shipping workstations with much better
    +> price/performance, or they'll be in even deeper trouble.

    And maybe offer CD-RW devices? I didn't see any mention of that being
    an option...

    James
     
    I R A Darth Aggie, Sep 2, 2003
    #10
  11. Godzilla

    Chris Morgan Guest

    "more per MHz" and "Assuming a linear scale" is irrelevant (not to
    mention these things never scale linearly). What matters is delivered
    performance. There is no evidence that the current US-III design could
    ever reach 2GHz in its current silicon process. 1.2 Ghz seems to be at
    or near its clock ceiling (I'm sure if Sun could get even 1.5GHz parts
    right now, they could sell them and make an excellent margin). They
    probably need a shrink and/or redesign to get significantly better
    real performance. In the time taken to get that out, we can expect IBM
    to further tweak G5 (they promise 3GHz next year).

    Chris
    --
    Chris Morgan
    "Post posting of policy changes by the boss will result in
    real rule revisions that are irreversible"

    - anonymous correspondent
     
    Chris Morgan, Sep 2, 2003
    #11
  12. OTOH, Apple needs to start using ECC RAM (AFAIK, they currently don't),
    and needs to make Mac OS X somewhere near as smart about recovering from
    uncorrectable errors as Solaris is (i.e. if it's in a dirty user process
    page, just kill the process; if it's in a clean cached page, just
    invalidate the page and don't bother anyone; only panic if you really have
    to; and memory permitting, remove pages with repeated soft errors from use
    as soon as feasible). Gonna have reliability problems (mystery crashes,
    even file corruption) without it.
     
    Richard L. Hamilton, Sep 7, 2003
    #12
  13. Godzilla

    Chris Morgan Guest

    This is a very disappointing oversight or cost-cutting measure by
    Apple. Perhaps when they release further G5 machines they will fix
    it. I hope so. The cost penalty for ECC on DRAM is all but gone these
    days. I understand it's a design cost in, say, the Apple-designed
    Northbridge chipset, and they have time to market issues, but having
    partnered with IBM who are fanatic about error management, I just
    can't understand their decision.

    Chris
    --
    Chris Morgan
    "Post posting of policy changes by the boss will result in
    real rule revisions that are irreversible"

    - anonymous correspondent
     
    Chris Morgan, Sep 8, 2003
    #13
  14. Why does "all but gone" phrase means exactly the opposite of what one
    would expect of "but" phrase to mean? "All gone" I can understand (here
    meaning "cost penalty for ECC is nonexistent these days"), but "but" usually
    changes the meaning of the phrase (giving it a totally opposite meaning).

    I am confused.

    Bye, Dragan


    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Sep 8, 2003
    #14
  15. Godzilla

    Chris Morgan Guest

    It's a use of 'but' to mean 'apart from' or 'except'. As in "my wife
    packed everything but the kitchen sink".

    English is wonderfully and gloriously inconsistent and redundant and
    contrary.

    Chris
    --
    Chris Morgan
    "Post posting of policy changes by the boss will result in
    real rule revisions that are irreversible"

    - anonymous correspondent
     
    Chris Morgan, Sep 8, 2003
    #15
  16. So the phrase "The cost penalty for ECC on DRAM is all but gone these
    days." basically means that the cost penalty in using ECC DRAM still
    exist. Right?

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Sep 8, 2003
    #16
  17. Godzilla

    Chris Morgan Guest

    Yes, what I meant to say is that it's almost but not quite entirely
    disappeared. My understanding is that there's always a physical cost
    (1 extra bit for each byte, or more) and the prices reflect the
    difference fairly faithfully, it's just that the overall cost of RAM
    has decreased by orders of magnitude, so why not standardise on ECC
    and be done!

    Chris

    --
    Chris Morgan
    "Post posting of policy changes by the boss will result in
    real rule revisions that are irreversible"

    - anonymous correspondent
     
    Chris Morgan, Sep 8, 2003
    #17
  18. Chris I agree with your technical argument, but I don't agree with your
    linguistic argument :)

    I'll just add the phrase "all but gone" to the list of exceptions in
    English language. And I will be "all but gone" :)

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Sep 8, 2003
    #18
  19. Godzilla

    CJT Guest

    A professor of mine once said that the only time people used the word
    "essentially" was when they were getting ready to lie to you. It's
    another one of those "exception" words in the English language. ;-)
     
    CJT, Sep 8, 2003
    #19
  20. I think "frankly" is like that too. Also "honestly", "candidly", etc.
    In other words, if someone has to _tell_ you they're sincere, they
    probably aren't.
     
    Richard L. Hamilton, Sep 9, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.