Intel is finally shipping the 64-bit Itanium
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Bari Ari bari at onelabs.comSun May 27 14:47:42 PDT 2001
- Previous message: Several questions obout Beofdisk
- Next message: firewire networking
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mark Hahn wrote: >>> >> chipset support to go along with them. For the time being Mips has the >> price performance edge since nobody has taken the ARM 10 to market yet >> and Intel yanked the FPU out of the XScale before they released it. > > > well MIPS has never delivered competitive performance, and seems to > be entirely out of the mass-market, as is ARM. do you know of someone > who is trying to mass-produce MIPS or ARM-based boxes? > Other than our low cost nodes, I am not aware of any. >> fine grained for a fraction of the cost, but X86 with OTS motherboards >> will also always be a kludge. X86 has 20 years of baggage for legacy >> support and also produce enormous amounts of heat as compared to RISC. > > > a very traditional, conservative response. alas, ia32 is the fastest > processor available excepting Alpha. and alas, Alpha is not exactly > price-competive in the usual sense. > > You're not factoring cost/performance/heat/footprint. Alpha also comes out highest as far as heat and cost with the P4 hot on its tail. They also require companion chips like x86s that eat up $$ and board space. The 700 MHz Alphas wouldn't be so bad if they were <$200, same with the PPC 750cxe. For fixed point using OTS XScale you get around 1000 Mips/W for around $50. Mips CPUs are about double that cost and 4x heat with the FPU. >> Low cost RISC clusters will outperform any x86 mass-market OTS clusters. > > > please give specific > >> RISC offers lower cost, smaller footprint, far less heat along with >> higher fixed and floating point performance. > > > I can't imagine why you say that, except reading too much PR. > for instance, the two fastest processors you can buy (spec int/fp) > are Alpha and P4. both are roughly comparable in heat. it's obviously > not the case that RISC systems in general are delivering any better > FP performance. > > or are you talking about some other more specialized measure? Sure the Alpha comes out on top if you just look at spec int/fp followed by P4. If you compare the systems cost vs GFLOPs/Watts/cu.in., X86 and Alpha come out as highest cost, and much higher heat. Bari Ari
- Previous message: Several questions obout Beofdisk
- Next message: firewire networking
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
