HP Finally Reveals The Alpha Marvel
brejc8 writes "HP have revealed the new range of AlphaServer systems. The new EV7 processors show very reasonable performance figures. Revealed by the inquirer the 1GHz versions have very similar SPEC scores as the 1GHz Itanium 2 (INT_2000 of 875 and FP_2000 of 1,500). This is very intersting after HP were rumoured to ensure that "...no Alpha benchmark will be released until the Itanium platform(s) is/are faster"."
I knew tech was tightening the belt, but they could only get one analyst to react enthusiastically? And you know that guy's looking over his shoulder... I'd be reacting DAMN enthusiastically if I was him.
they should, all current versions of the alpha procs run linux great. (as verified by the alphaserver 5000 sitting under my desk running RH 7.2)
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
In my mind HP should either go one way or the other, not release a processor most people would claim to be better than Itanium. Why didn't Intel just buy the Alpha architecture and continue it?
I know that AMD and Intel have both dissected the EV8 planned processor, and used parts of it for themselves. EV8 was going to be 4-way SMT (Intel uses that now as HyperThreading) and have integrated Northbridge on die (same as Hammer chips).
Its a sad state of affairs when the superior architecture gets cut up and sold to different companies to produce two slightly inferior chips.
... at least on OpenMP type applications. Cribbed shamelessly from realworldtech.com:
...
SPECOMP2001 results, base/peak:
4 cpu:
EV7/1150: 6027/6824
I2/1000: 3762/4091
8 cpu:
EV7/1150: 10349/11929
POWER4+/1450: 9458/ 9694
PA8700+/875: 4375/ 4541
16 cpu:
EV7/1150: 17724/20637
PA8700+/875: 7763/ 8788
R14k/600: 7265/ 7726
Note that this is not a pure CPU test (like SpecINT/FP), but rather a test of SMP performance. Looks like the tin-foil hat "Wait 'til EV8!" brigade might have been on to something
'jfb
To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
Does anybody think that HP isn't going to phase out the Alpha? For some, that doesn't matter much, but I imagine that lots of people are going to be hesitant about buying into a system whose days are so obviously numbered.
So first, the inquirer states that HP will be posting no perf. specs for the server until blah blah blah... (But in reading the article, it's "a guy who knows overheard someone say that they won't be posting...".)
Later, it finds performance specs and posts them? (Without listing a source for those numbers...)
Odd journalism to me... Sure, the Alpha sounds pretty good... But I'll be lame and wait for the official numbers...
Here's your chance to datamine the previous story for +5, insightful comments to karma whore here!
I may work for HP, but that does not imply that my opinions are theirs.
This is a server system? A closer examination reveals that 'Hewlett Packard' is an anagram of 'whacked platter'. Better back up those hard drives now.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
What, Oscar Wilde was a beta tester?
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Yes, yes it is a lot easier to manage.
:
And for the schmuck who said "Real operating systems supports Beowolf"...
a) It's Beowulf, not "beowolf". Check your literary history.
b) Bullpoop. Beowulf's got nothing to do with the OS, and everything to do with the applications. You show me an Oracle that uses MPI or PVM.
Of course! There's no need. Oracle already has OPS (Oracle parallel server). So yes, you can have an "8x8" cluster of Oracle nodes. Ever try to manage one of those? It's definitely a cluster ---- a cluster*uck!
SMP is a beautiful thing. It's not exactly linearly scalable, but close. And the beautiful part is that if your app is multithreaded, it'll automagically take advantage of the SMP capabilities of the system -- no need to code to the MPI or PVM API's.
Just for sheer "damn, that's cool" factor, think about this:
A Solaris 8 CD will boot and install on a single-proc, 33mhz SPARCstation 10 from 1992 all the way through a 108-processor, 900mhz/each Sun Fire 15000.
Now _THAT_'s scalable.
--NBVB
There is absolutely no way HP will try and take on Intel or anyone else in the market for low-end single processor systems. For starters the Alpha costs a lot because it has been made with scalability in mind, it cant compete on price with an Intel chip. The size of Intel and the volumes of chips they produce means HP could not compete (seen AMD's P&L figures lately?). Micro$oft also pulled the plug on alpha support years ago, and windoze still drives the low end single processor market (despite all the hype surrounding Linux).
Compaq were too scared of Intel to even remain in the high end market, where Intel are yet to make an impact. The competition is going to be fierce, it will be interesting to see if Sun and IBM can compete in the long term. Sun are already starting to look shaky, but at least they were willing to stay and fight. I think Intel will eventually push it's competitors out of the processor market, except maybe for a few niche products. The market is IMO a natural monopoly just waiting for one company to step up to the plate. The fact that Alpha is being killed just proves the point that superior technology counts for little.
Alpha is dead, this is the last hurah in what was a very significant era. Great technology developed by brilliant technicians and killed off by incompetent managers.