Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:55:27 -0400
From:      Allen Landsidel <all@biosys.net>
To:        "Heredity Choice" <stork@QNET.COM>, "Nick Slager" <nicks@albury.net.au>, "jadream" <jadream@chat.ru>
Cc:        <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: FBSD & Itanium?
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20001028110103.00c8c978@mail.megapathdsl.net>
In-Reply-To: <000a01c040ee$250ae900$73c6ddd1@STORK>
References:  <20001027221341.C22013@albury.net.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:48 10/28/2000 -0700, Heredity Choice wrote:
>Predictions I have seen suggest that the Itanium will be nowhere near as
>fast as the DEC/Samsung/Compaq/IBM Alpha, but will be much more expensive to
>manufacture.
>
>IBM has an Alpha prototype running at 1200 MH. To do the same amount of
>work, an Athlon would have to run at about 2400 MH.

Just as a little FYI, here are come current numbers.

21164 Alpha @ 600MHz : 18.8 SpecInt, 29.0 SpecFP.
21264 Alpha @ 575MHz : 25.9 SpecInt, 40.9 SpecFP.
Athlon @ 600MHz : 28.0 SpecInt, 22 SpecFP.
PIII @ 600MHz : 24.0 SpecInt, 15.9 SpecFP.

Those numbers are for BASE processors.. The original K7 Athlon, and the 
Katmai core PIII.
For the Thunderbird I wasn't able to find any scores, and the other P III 
scores for the coppermine core aren't that much different from the Katmai core.

The 21364 Alpha (not in production yet) is running at 1.2GHz, SpecInt 75.0, 
SpecFP 160.0 (estimated speeds.)
That is probably the Alpha you're talking about, and it's a ways off in 
production.  For timeframe purposes, it's pointless to compare it to any 
x86 machine available now, as by the time that is out, the 
Sledgehammer/Clawhammer (K8-64bit) processors, as well as the 
Willamette/Foster/Etc (IA-64 - P7) processors should be out.

You have to always keep in mind floating-point vs. integer math as well.. 
other considerations such as price/performance etc are kind of moot I guess 
here, considering the absurd direction this email is taking..


>The lineup of Alphas currently produced range from a Microway workstation
>for about $2000 to a Compaq cluster being developed for the U.S. Government
>which will be the most powerful computer in the world.

A Microway 21264 workstation (single processor) with a 667MHz processor and 
128MB of memory is $8,500, not $2,000.  A dual 500 21264 is $13,000.  On 
that note, a 1GHz Athlon system from the same company is $3,300, with 
512MB.  So, maybe yes an Athlon system will have to be twice as fast MHz 
wise as an Alpha to be equally as fast in benchmarks, but who cares if it 
still costs only 1/3 as much?  To equip the Alpha with memory is not cheap 
either, considering that it's nearly 3x as expensive as PC133 memory for 
the Athlon.

Currently #1 system is the ASCI White at LLNL, 12 Trillion ops/sec, and is 
a cluster of 8,192 RS/6000 processors.  Plans to extend this to the 30 
Teraflop range are on track for next year, with plans for 100 Teraflop 
range for ~ 2003.

www.llnl.gov/asci for more information.

The machine you're talking about is ASCI Q, and as usual with your 
statements in this email.. does not exist yet.  It is not going to exist 
until 2004 (scheduled), and is going to be roughly the same speed as ASCI 
White in 2003.

http://www5.compaq.com/hpc/tsn/iss017/hptc_iss017_fa.html#1



>The best news is that most of the single-processor Alphas already are
>equipped to run FreeBSD. Apple's Darwin, with its microkernel, should be an
>easy port to the multiprocessor Alpha and the Alpha clusters.
>
>I have just acquired an Alpha EB164 for 5% of its cost new 5 years ago. The
>only hardware incompatible with FreeBSD was the video card, which has no
>driver in XFree86 4.01 and has swapped places with the card in my Windows
>box.  From the same period, a Deskstation Raptor, a DEC XL or a DEC XLT will
>not run FreeBSD.

All in all, this was a really long and stupid email that had nothing to do 
with answering the simple question asked, which was just about IA-64 
support in FreeBSD.  I would say this, if Linux is going to support it, 
then it'll be a compiler option in gcc.  If that is the case, then FreeBSD 
will be supporting it as well, unless something drastic happens in the near 
future.

-- Proud owner of a 600MHz Athlon, 512MB of memory, all Ultra/160 SCSI, A 
19" monitor, a GeForce256, and other misc options that all together still 
cost me about 1/4 what a similarly equipped Alpha would have cost. --




-------signature file-------
PGP Key Fingerprint:
446B 7718 B219 9F1E 43DD  8E4A 6BE9 D739 CCC5 7FD7

"I don't think [Linux] will be very successful in the long run."
"My experience and some of my friends' experience is that Linux is quite 
unreliable. Microsoft is really unreliable but Linux is worse."
-Ken Thompson, Interview May 1999.

http://www.freebsd.org
FreeBSD - The Power to Serve

http://www.rfnj.org
Radio Free New Jersey - 395 streams - 96kbps @ 44.1khz



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20001028110103.00c8c978>