From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 17 23:16:32 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 712A816A419 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:16:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from news@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net) Received: from mx3.netclusive.de (mx3.netclusive.de [89.110.132.133]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5D813C469 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:16:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from news@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net) Received: from nermal.rz1.convenimus.net (Fdc73.f.ppp-pool.de [195.4.220.115]) (Authenticated sender: ncf1534p2) by mx3.netclusive.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57DB2604CBD for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:16:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: by nermal.rz1.convenimus.net (Postfix, from userid 8) id D723E1521D; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:07:05 +0200 (CEST) To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Path: not-for-mail From: Christian Baer Newsgroups: gmane.os.freebsd.devel.sparc Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:07:05 +0200 (CEST) Organization: Convenimus Projekt Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <2213.5369-3380-502956735-1192610714@email.cz> <20071017.182350.193693728.hrs@allbsd.org> <47161875.4030005@alaska.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: sunny.rz1.convenimus.net X-Trace: nermal.rz1.convenimus.net 1192662425 32614 192.168.100.5 (17 Oct 2007 23:07:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@convenimus.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:07:05 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (FreeBSD/6.2-RELEASE-p8 (sparc64)) Subject: Re: FBSD on SunBlade 1500 Silver X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:16:32 -0000 On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:13:09 -0800 Royce Williams wrote: >> IIRC FreeBSD does not support UltraSPARC III processor yet. > > How much overlap is there between potential UltraSPARC III support and > the ongoing work on UltraSPARC-T1 support? Practically none. The T1 ist a completely different typ of CPU, designed mainly as a server processor that runs many tasks at the same time. That is the reason why the T1 is a multi-core by design. The Sun4u was designed mainly as a workstation processor. Although the T1 probably wouldn't look all that bad in a workstation when compared to a 4u, don't forget how old the 4u is. Workstations usually have few tasks running at the same time and need these to run fast. The T1's design makes each core relatively slow but all cores put together make it quite powerful. Put into some sort of analogy: Think of the T1 as many (cargo) train engines put together to pull one train. If you have more engines, you can pull more cargo. But you won't get the train to go any faster. A T1 is a MAC, not a Ferrari. :-) The 4u was the Ferrari of its time. Regards Chris