My manage was inviting everybody in his department to see the movie during bussness hours. After spending almos 21 hours in the ofice the day before, I told mi manager that I was planning on staying at work because I had a lot of shit to do. He told me NO!!! that I'm going to the movie an that the end of that and that after the movie I should go home get some sleep.
Ive only been working with this guy for three weeks now, but I think Im going to like it:)
I wonder who long till IBM comes out with another super computer base on the Power4 processor. It should make the game more interesting since Power4 destroys Power3 in terms of performance and memory bandwith.
The larger IBM Machines uses the IBM PowerPC 630+ in some form or other. These are the RS64, Power3, and the soon to be realese Power4. For the most part, they are binary compatible with other PPC machines.
I have never tried Linux on the sparc64; at least not in the development sense, jut as a user. The thing is that these benchmarks were comparing PPC vs. x86. That was the basis of my comparison, and although my work is mostly related to the Power3 not the G[3-4], they are sufficiently similar to draw my conclusions. I've use Linux on the alpha, ppc, s390 and x86 and have a total of 6 years of experience with Linux. In my opinion, x86 and alphas are one of the more stable platforms supported under Linux, but I admit that I haven't tried it out on mips or sparc. Distribution wise, x86 is the most widely supported of all platforms. Personally, I think I've never did anything interesting with Linux\Sparc64 because at the time Red Hat was the only thing available. I started my trip into Linux with Slackware and have been a loyal fan ever since, even thought I've tried other countless distributions in the pass. Now that slackware is available on sparc, I might try it out if I could only find a machine to start it on. But for the every day normal home user, there are basically two options x86 or Apple's PPC machines, and I think that these are the basis of these benchmark results. For home usage, I do prefer the x86 because they are dirt-cheap; not exactly the best reason or the best choice, but I do think you get more for the money.
Another important thing to consider is that Linux is mostly optimize for the x86. The Power PC port works, but there is a lot of improvement that needs to be done to before comparing it with the x86 code. MM is a mayor area of improvement in the PPC code and possible the reason why the benchmark spend most of the time on kernel space.
It is also important to consider that this was not a very good comparison and I don't consider the benchmarks to be precise.
Slashdot Mirror
My manage was inviting everybody in his department to see the movie during bussness hours. After spending almos 21 hours in the ofice the day before, I told mi manager that I was planning on staying at work because I had a lot of shit to do. He told me NO!!! that I'm going to the movie an that the end of that and that after the movie I should go home get some sleep.
:)
Ive only been working with this guy for three weeks now, but I think Im going to like it
I wonder who long till IBM comes out with another super computer base on the Power4 processor. It should make the game more interesting since Power4 destroys Power3 in terms of performance and memory bandwith.
The larger IBM Machines uses the IBM PowerPC 630+ in some form or other. These are the RS64, Power3, and the soon to be realese Power4. For the most part, they are binary compatible with other PPC machines.
You are right....
I have never tried Linux on the sparc64; at least not in the development sense, jut as a user. The thing is that these benchmarks were comparing PPC vs. x86. That was the basis of my comparison, and although my work is mostly related to the Power3 not the G[3-4], they are sufficiently similar to draw my conclusions. I've use Linux on the alpha, ppc, s390 and x86 and have a total of 6 years of experience with Linux. In my opinion, x86 and alphas are one of the more stable platforms supported under Linux, but I admit that I haven't tried it out on mips or sparc. Distribution wise, x86 is the most widely supported of all platforms. Personally, I think I've never did anything interesting with Linux\Sparc64 because at the time Red Hat was the only thing available. I started my trip into Linux with Slackware and have been a loyal fan ever since, even thought I've tried other countless distributions in the pass. Now that slackware is available on sparc, I might try it out if I could only find a machine to start it on. But for the every day normal home user, there are basically two options x86 or Apple's PPC machines, and I think that these are the basis of these benchmark results. For home usage, I do prefer the x86 because they are dirt-cheap; not exactly the best reason or the best choice, but I do think you get more for the money.
Another important thing to consider is that Linux is mostly optimize for the x86. The Power PC port works, but there is a lot of improvement that needs to be done to before comparing it with the x86 code. MM is a mayor area of improvement in the PPC code and possible the reason why the benchmark spend most of the time on kernel space.
It is also important to consider that this was not a very good comparison and I don't consider the benchmarks to be precise.