On Fri, 21 Sep 2001 22:18:33 -0700 (PDT)
Luke McKee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> The London office of where I work has been saying that
> for price & speed Linux has been outperforming the new
> cheap Sun Blade 100/1000's with Expert3D graphics.
Sun does not sell any x86 based products apart from the Cobalt low
end server products.
Sun UltraSparc based hardware is having trouble keeping up with
Intel/AMD x86 hardware on a perfromance/price basis, on a pure
CPU MHz basis and on pipeline depth.
For the SPECcpu 2000 benchmark results see:
http://open.specbench.org/osg/cpu2000/results/cpu2000.html
This does list a few of more recent SunBlade products which are
definitely slower than the current x86 offerings.
> Is it because Glibc is profiled a lot more by the open
> source development community. Does it perform better
> than commercial solutions like Sun on similar
> hardware? any comments?
I'd say it has very little to do with optimisation and a whole lot
to do with porcessor throughput issues.
All that said, the UltraSparc is a really great processor from a
CPU architecture POV. In addition Sun hardware is really well built
and scales really well to multiprocessor systems.
Intel has now had 5+ years of being the highest selling CPU manufacturer
and has 10-100 times more to spend on processor R&D than Sun. It also has
better access to the best fabrication plants because of its voume of
production. With this as it is, its hardly surprising that Sun has trouble
keeping up.
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"Windows NT - How to make a 100 MIPS Linux workstation perform like
an 8 MHz 286" -- Christopher B. Browne
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
