3 ms·
I mentioned that SPARC performance stopped being a central focus with the death of Rock, in favor of massively-multicore, low-cost designs derived from Niagara.
by hapless 12y ago
I mentioned that SPARC performance stopped being a central focus with the death of Rock, in favor of massively-multicore, low-cost designs derived from Niagara.
You pasted an Oracle press release that focused on parallel performance.
I complained, and pointed out SPECcpu as a common measurement.
You responded with SPECcpu_rate, a different benchmark focused on parallel performance measurement. It is not surprising that Niagara-derivative chips do well. It is also not surprising that, core for core, they can't match modern commodity systems for density, performance, or cost.
p.s. The "reliability" argument went out the window with VMware. Every fortune 500 is using x86 with VMware HA to provide the redundancy that would have once come from enterprise RISC. (Given how few RISC systems were ever configured with redundant memory or CPUs, VMware-on-commodity is probably offering a substantially better service level.)
p.p.s. a basic 1U x86 server will typically have between 0.75 and 1.5 TB of RAM in it. Yes, TB, as in terabytes. Virtualization provides a market for compact, low-wattage systems with significant memory. That's just the 1Us. In 2014, "Large" x86 boxes are very large indeed.
Lastly, I, too, miss Solaris/SPARC. It was a great platform that I enjoyed working with. I don't miss the associated hardware support contracts that came floating by after the Oracle buyout. It has been several years since I found a contract where SPARC or Solaris were anything but legacy platforms. It's sad, but it's not a mystery.
- binarycrusader 12y agoSPEC CPU Rate is part of the SPEC CPU benchmark; it is not a "different" benchmark. The reliability argument doesn't "go out the window"; what do you think that software is virtualised on? And to top it off, you're losing a significant amount of performance by using a virtualisation solution like vmware. In fact, there's entire segments of industry that won't accept the latency typical virtualisation technologies bring. As for the 0.75 and 1.5 TB of ram argument, perhaps you missed what I said about terabytes. You have any Intel boxes with 32 terabytes lying around? While you may have not seen any contracts floating around for SPARC hardware, I have quite recently.. Finally, as for "legacy" status, SPARC and Solaris have features not found anywhere else that are continuing to be developed and added even today. It's only a "legacy" platform if you completely ignore the technology there. And Solaris runs just fine on x86 thank you very much.