>Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:09:15 -0700
>To: [log in to unmask]
>From: Bill Lancaster <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Upgrading a CPU
>
>Doug Johnson wrote:
>
>>        I've been given the option of upgrading my 950 to
>>a newer (faster) box. My hardware vendor has given me the
>>impression that it is as simple as pluging in the new box
>>doing a load from tape. According to my 1991 pricing guide
>>the 950 is on tier six. The box my vendor recommends is a
>>947lx which is tier two. Our primary application is MNT (MM3000)
>>and we make heavy use of SQL for reporting and will soon
>>add data entry screen's using VB. The main concern is CPU
>>load. Response time is becoming unacceptable for our dispatchers.
>>
>>My questions, should anyone desire to respond, are:
>>
>>        Is it really as simple as a reload?
>
>Yes and no.  These upgrades are always trickier than they look.  I just
worked with a customer in a very similar situation.  They upgraded from a
955 to a 968, with few, though significant, issues to deal with.
>
>>
>>        Should I look for a higher rated box?
>
>The answer to this question is really , "It depends" (like all performance
questions).  The real question is "What exactly is happening on your 950?".
If your problems are really CPU related instead of memory, disk I/O or
networking, and you have latent demand (that is, demand which isn't
satisfied and will take up some percentage of your new system from
installation), you may not be happy with the 947.  Technically, from the 950
to the 947 is 1.5, 950 to the 968 is 3.3 and 950 to the 939 is 4.3.
>
>To answer whether any of these systems is enough, you have to ask and
answer the following questions:
>
>1.  How much latent demand do I have?  If it is significant, you will have
to estimate how much of the upgrade you will eat immediately.  For example,
if you go to the 947 and you have 30 percent latent demand, you will net out
20 percent improvement.
>
>2.  What expectation have I set with the users?  Are they expecting
superior performance when I upgrade? ( I know, that was two questions...).
If the users' expectation is set this way, the net 20 percent from the 947
may not be enough.
>
>3.  What are my licensing fees going to be?  This may be the most impacting
of all questions.  As things are going now, hardware is increasingly a
diminishing portion of the upgrade expense.  It may be cheaper for you, in
net terms, to upgrade to a 939.
>>
>>        What is involved from HP's point of view?
>>
>
>Not much. More and more, HP is encouraging this type of business to go
through VAR's or DAR's.   The main issues which involve HP involve your
support contracts.
>
>>My HP sales rep has been less than helpful and the one CE
>>that I talked to couldn't even find a current software tier
>>listing for HP3000's. With the exception of the SQL apps I
>>have been running a one man HP shop for three years so I am still
>>a little wet behind the ears. Your input/advise will be
>>greatly appreciated.
>
>You have an HP sales rep????  If I were you, I would hook up with a
reputable DAR and work through them.
>
>>
>>
>>*++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++*
>>  Doug Johnson                          Phone   : 408-742-0790
>>  Lockheed Martin Missles and Space Co. Fax     : 408-742-6440
>>                                        Internet: [log in to unmask]
>>*++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++*
>>
>>
>
---
Bill Lancaster         Lancaster Consulting
(541)926-1542 (phone)  (541)917-0807 (fax)
[log in to unmask]       http://www.proaxis.com/~bill