While the software-induced degradation of the A400 is annoying, keep in mind
that it was done in order to provide a lower-priced entry point for smaller
customers.  With the elimination of limited user licensing, the only way for
this machine's capacity to be limited (to keep third-party software pricing
from being prohibitive) was to slow it down.  This could have been done by
manufacturing a slower processor, but that would probably be more costly.
The advantage of slower hardware would be that no one would feel cheated, I
guess.  Perhaps retaining user license tiers at the low end would have been
better, but HP was responding to customer feedback, they say, when they
eliminated them.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Woods [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 1:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: HP Press Release about hp3000


Gavin wrote:
>All current A-class and some N-class systems are "clock
>reduced" meaning they have some sort of delay loop in MPE that
>prevents you from using all of the CPU cycles of the
>(typically) 440MHz processor in the box.

And it appears that it also prevents you from using all the I/O and
memory bus cycles at the same time.

>As a result of doing MPE to HP-UX performance comparisons it
>has recently been determined that the "110MHz" numbers appear
>to have been made up by HP marketing, and that these boxes
>actually only allow you to use about 55MHz out of the 440MHz
>available, so the "good news" is that your "110MHz" A-class
>MPE system will actually become about *eight* times faster in
>CPU speed when turned into an uncrippled HP-UX system.

So this means an "110MHz" (really 50-something MHz) A400 is throwing
away 7/8 of the whole machines throughput.  Can I have my daily
allotment of 3 hours processing throughput all at once?  We could do
daily production in the first hour, evening batch processing in the
second hour and "overnight backup" in the third hour... All in the
course of a short afternoon!

P.S.  In case it's not obvious, I personally find artificial hardware
performance crippling to be extremely distasteful.  Fortunately, Linux,
BSD and other open-source environments aren't conducive to such
"marketing factors".

P.P.S.  The spell-checker in this email client complains that
"uncrippled" isn't a word.  Is the correct spelling "repaired"?
--
Jeff Woods
[log in to unmask]
#pragma standard_disclaimer
/* I don't speak for my employer even if they happen to agree with me.
*/

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *