Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 19:29:27 03/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 02, 2003 at 10:22:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 02, 2003 at 02:39:08, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>On March 01, 2003 at 20:17:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On March 01, 2003 at 11:48:50, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>> >>>>On March 01, 2003 at 10:11:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>Sun doesn't sell more than a single million-dollar computer a year. They >> >>I couldn't find specific numbers on this, but I really doubt that. How else >>could they get to $5 billion in SPARC _server_ sales last year? Do you have any >>actual data you can give? I'd be interested to see it. > >I'll look. Several "trade journals" quote such market shares frequently, I'll >see what I can dig up. I already gave market shares. You made a specific claim that Sun didn't sell more than one multi-million dollar machine last year. I want proof of that claim. >>>are hopeless in that market, because that is SGI Challenge territory and the >> >>I'd say SGI sells less big boxes than SPARC these days. SGI is poised to have >>_total_ revenue of only $1 billion in fiscal 2003. That's counting the Itanium >>machines they will begin selling soon. >> >>>SGI eats the sparc in any benchmark ever created... As will the big >> >>Care to back that up with some actual data? I can't find a single benchmark >>where a MIPS chip is above the newest SPARC chips. Nor can I find a MIPS-based >>machine faster than any SPARC machine. > >I'm not sure where you are looking. We just bought a batch of (I think) 900mhz >ultra-sparcs (6). They are 1/4 the raw computing speed of our best intel box >and I am not talking about SMP, just raw CPU power. I can post a crafty bench >if you want to compare. They are _dog_ slow. Are you not talking about MIPS machines? I already know the Intel processors are a lot faster. >>>itanium boxes. Hell, even a multi-xeon will eat any sparc on a cpu for cpu >>>basis without even using SMT. :) >> >>I believe you there. But as you pointed out before, processor speed doesn't >>matter much in the server world. > >No, but when you start designing high-performance busses, multiple I/O channels, >ultra-high memory bandwidth, it is likely that top-end processor chips will be >used as well, particularly 64 bit... Regardless of what you say, SPARC is selling a lot more than MIPS is in that market segment.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.