Slashdot Mirror


Sun Open-Sourcing UltraSPARC Design

AKAImBatman writes "While everyone was busy with the holiday season, Sun Microsystems quietly announced the start of the OpenSPARC project. Unlike previous CPUs that were based on the "Open" SPARC specifications (such as LEON), Sun is releasing the complete Verilog source code to their latest and greatest microprocessor. Their current time frame for releasing the source code to the public is in March of 2006. Given their success with the OpenSolaris project, it seems that this is likely to be more than just vaporware. So get out your Virtex FPGAs and your Verilog compilers, and let's get ready to hack some hardware!"

15 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. The roadmap is clear by d41d8cd98f00b204e980 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Sun has a comprehensive roadmap for UltraSPARC going forward and combining forces with Fujutsu on SPARC64.

    These new servers absolutely rock, and at superb prices.

    I once had the pleasure of a 4-way Opteron v40z with a development version of 64-bit Solaris 10. It was a screamer, especially compared to our 4-way Dell P4 Xeon box, and 64-bit.

    It was plenty fast enough to host 4 zones and several developers working on KDE, gcc and all manner of other stuff.

    At last, Sun looks like it's turning the corner (despite the best efforts of some of its PHBs - no names mentioned).

    Good luck Sun.

  2. Implementability by Skowronek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are some questions. FPGAs aren't that big... a XC2V6000 that costs $4500 is about the right size for four cores of a simple 4-SIMD 24bit fixed-point signal processor - a UltraSPARC will not fit in it, unless it's seriously cut down.

    Also speed of FPGAs is a huge let-down, unless a design takes advantage of their structure. There is no reason to believe that the processor will be designed for FPGAs... It is likely to be therefore very slow, even if you can implement it.

    1. Re:Implementability by Jerry+Coffin · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Parent should be modded up -- there haven't been many other intelligent comments on this story.

      Contrary to TFA's claim, I suspect for a lot of people, Sun's previous attempt at open-sourcing a core (to the microSPARC) would be a lot more interesting if you wanted to put the design on an FPGA (unfortunately, I'm not at all sure this is still available). I'm not sure how well it would work on an FPGA either, but at least it stands a whole lot better chance, and it's probably still plenty of CPU for most typical FPGA-based designs.

      Then again, www.opencores.org, www.fpga4fun.com, etc., already have quite a number of CPU cores available, many without the likelihood of patent problems, and such that are likely to accompany using a SPARC core. Better still, quite a few of these have already been tested in various FPGAs and a few have been put into ASICs as well.

      --
      The universe is a figment of its own imagination.

      --
      The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
  3. Re:FP! by alman · · Score: 5, Funny

    FP! SP! TP!
    Frame Pointer
    Stack Pointer
    ummmm...
    What's TP??
    Oh yeah
    Toilet Paper - aka SCO Legal Documentation.

  4. Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Rat brains are cheaper and self-replicating.

  5. Re:Pardon my ignorance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Go to http://www.opencores.org/ for more examples of Open Hardware.

  6. Re:too far? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They still own the patents on various parts of the implementation.

    From what I understand of patent law, if someone else wants to distribute hardware, they'll still need to get patent licenses.

    IOW, Sun is becoming an IP company of a rare sort.

  7. Jonathan Schwartz's Weblog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Jonathan Schwartz's Weblog: Our Most Valuable Intellectual Property

    And now you have a pretty good idea of what's in store for tomorrow. (Pay careful attention to the "open market for parts" comment - we're planning on delivering an extraordinary surprise to the industry. No sense in letting the software folks have all the fun...)

  8. Re:too far? by blastwave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally I enjoy watching Red Hat, Novell/SUSE, Dell and IBM all squirm as Sun undercuts their prices in every product line. I can get Solaris for free, Sun Cluster for free, the tools for free, Java for free, the source code to Solaris for free and a dual core Opteron or multi-core UltraSparc for dirt cheap. The FUD being sprayed by Red Hat/IBM and Novell is just staggering.

    Dennis Clarke
    http://www.blastwave.org/

  9. I'm only half joking, so don't mod me funny by appleLaserWriter · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, how long until we can buy discount chinese-made ultraSPARC chips at Wal-Mart?

  10. Re:ok, I'm convinced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sun has systems based on the UltraSPARC-T1 and they're available right now starting under $3000. Their throughput and performance for multithreaded applications is simply staggering. In fact, the top-of-the-line Sun Fire T2000 server based on this processor is about $6000 less than the comparably-equipped Dell PowerEdge 6850 (which is the best that we could find from them) and our performance tests with real-world applications show the T2000 providing well over twice the performance while drawing well under half the power and taking half the space (2U versus 4U).

    Sure it may not be the best machine to use if you want to play Quake 4 or Half Life 2, but for scalable multithreaded apps, it really is quite impressive.

  11. Re:Pardon my ignorance... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pardon my threadjack, but I just realized that the editors secretly switched my link for a competing brand. Unlike Folgers, I'm afraid it's much cooler to get processor news straight from the horse's mouth.

  12. Re:Put down the crackpipe by adrianmonk · · Score: 5, Informative
    So? RHEL is a support contract. I doubt Sun is handing out service contracts for free or even price matching RH.

    Perhaps you should start comparing prices, then:

    • Sun Support is available in three levels: Basic, Standard, and Premium. The prices are $120/yr, $240/yr, and $360/yr for a single processor-socket system. $360/yr gets you unlimited live phone support 24/7.
    • Meanwhile, Red Hat offers a wider variety of support plans, including separate workstation and server plans. The cheapest server plan is $349/yr and the most expensive is $2499/yr. You'd have to get the $2499 plan to get 24/7 phone support.

    So, it would appear that Sun's support prices are actually lower rather than beating Red Hat's. In fact, for one of Sun's cheapest server systems, you can get Platinum support for $2304 for three years. Platinum support includes both 24/7 software support and 24/7 two-hour response time on-site hardware support. That's cheaper then one year of Red Hat's software-only 24/7 support.

    Sun hardware is getting competitive, which is a good thing but 'dirt cheap'? Put down the crackpipe.

    Again, compare prices:

    • You can buy a 1U, Opteron server system from Sun for $745.00. It doesn't have a disk, but you can add one for $150, bringing the price to $895.
    • Meanwhile, the cheapest rack mount server of any kind you can get from Dell will cost you $999. It does include a disk, but its processor is a Celeron with 256K cache.

    So, the Sun server may not be as cheap as building a system out of spare parts lying around in your basement, but it really is pretty cheap compared to the competition in that space.

  13. Re:FPGAs are key by InvalidError · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try fitting a P4 or UltraSPARC in a Virtex4-1xxLX, you are going to run into several problems.

    1) The ASIC runs at 1GHz+ frequency, the V4 implementation would run around 300MHz at best and cost over $10k for the FPGA alone.
    2) Most FPGAs block-RAM and LUT-based RAM can be dual-ported at most, this is problematic for register files where a dozen registers may be concurrently accessed during any given cycle. This would require either register duplication or time-multiplexed register access and a corresponding down-clocking of everything else.
    3) Logic is expended pretty fast if you do stuff like 64x64 multipliers using logic only. Sure, there are dedicated multipliers in most modern low-cost FPGAs but these are hard-wired to handle DSP-centric MAC operations.
    4) People are upset with desktop CPU's power usage but building similar CPUs on FPGAs would require many times more power to achieve the same performance since FPGA's switch fabric and general-purpose programmable elements have way more parasitic capacitance than ASICs' internal hard-wired traces and circuits. With ASIC, 1M logic gates is only ~6M transistors but a ~1M gate-equivalent FPGA with switch fabric and configuration bits goes beyond 50M transistors with much longer routing delays.

    FPGAs are not particularly suitable for general-purpose processing where the system has extensive subsystem interdependencies and shared elements. Where they can truly shine is in applications where the data flow is mostly regular and where processing can be broken down into well-defined self-contained stages like telecom, crypto and DSP. Another area where FPGAs can shine is hard-realtime where they can have dedicated logic to handle time-critical events with 100% deterministic deadlines, unlike modern CPUs and OSes where realtime applications have to put up with unpredictable branch mispredicts, cache misses, preemption, out-of-order execution, etc.

    That said, the UltraSPARC's verilog source should make for really interesting reading for logic and digital system engineers and academics like myself. This move makes a lot of sense: CPU designers need to hire new talent and this new talent needs to learn about common practice in real-world designs to be of any use or they'll spend most of their first months just catching up. With a real-world design in the wild, CPU-designer job postings could ask people to specify which architectural components they would like to improve and the interviews could steer towards presenting those improvements instead of often irrelevant technicalities.

  14. Re:too far? by blastwave · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well I guess its time to look at some facts. I like facts. That are really solid and, well, factual. You know? Tough to argue with.

    RedHat, Suse, Mandrake, etc all offer linux as OSS

    OpenSolaris has an OSI license. It is called the CDDL. Welcome to open source.

    This includes not just the compiler but a very wide array of tools.

    Sun offers the Sun ONE Studio tools for free. Vastly superior to GCC in every measurable way. Of course that is my opinion based on years of code crunching. The fact is that these are available for free. Download and go.
    I believe that the source is being made open also.

    ALL of the source code of anything marked OSS is available

    Absolutely. All of the components under the CDDL are open. Have fun.
    More on the way.
    Heck, Sun just spent FIVE years working on an entirely new filesystem called ZFS and they released it and open sourced it at the same time. How cool is that?
    See : http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2005-11/sunf lash.20051130.1.html

    Now, you mention DELL and IBM. Well they both sell hardware with services.

    I have heard that .. somewhere. I think Sun does that too. So does my corner store.

    Neither of them directly deal with Linux

    see : http://www.redhat.com/sundown/
    Why is there an IBM logo on that page? Why is there an edition RHEL for POWER but not for Sparc ? Why does it say in big BOLD graphics there "Migrate to Linux with IBM + Red Hat"?
    Now go look at : http://www.redhat.com/en_us/USA/rhel/compare/serve r/
    The absolute cheapest edition is $349 and the top is $2499 !!
    I can get Solaris for FREE.
    For UltraSparc or for Intel or AMD Opteron.
    The cost of an OPTIONAL software support contract is less than 34 cents a day.
    I ought to know .. I bought one because it was five times cheaper than my daily coffee intake and I can't live with that either.
    See my blog : http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/pivot/entry. php?id=107
    While you're surfing, look at the three guys at :
    http://www.novell.com/linux/unixtolinux/
    They are all parked on a bench outside the IT Directors office waiting to tell how reiserfs screwed up their data again and they lost the corporate database because of some messed up kernel patch.
    But that is just me guessing.

    You can buy just about any size machine from these 2 companies that
    is both smaller/cheaper to larger/more expensive than what Sun offers.

    Sure. I agree with "cheap".
    Show me a 64-bit Opteron that is faster, cooler and less costly than a SunFire X2100.
    Really. Anyone can make junk that is cheap and monsters that are massively expensive.
    Show me a 64-bit machine that has more horsepower than an 8-core 1.2GHz SunFire T1000 or a 64-bit AMD Opteron machine with more horsepower than the SunFire X2100.
    For less money.
    Oh, and the Opteron gear has to be certified to run Windows as well as Linux as well as a real UNIX.
    Good luck.

    when I look at the top 500 fastest computers, where is Solaris in there?
    Does it hold the majority of the top 10, let alone the top 500?

    Take a long hard stare at my blog from a little while ago :
    http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/pivot/entry. php?id=113
    I count, what? 16 e