Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 7 Mar 2001 20:39:46 -0800 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Mark Landin after Paul Taffel:
> >Kenneth Sletten calculates that the CPU price-performance
> >ratio runs about 12:1 in favor of the HP9000.
> >
> >I believe the ratio is far worse than this. ........
> >I suspect that the reason why we only see a 65%
> >improvement is because the PA-RISC 2.0 8500 chip is
> >running MPE/iX, compiled with PA-RISC 1.0 compiler
> >optimizations. That's right, we lose an additional 100% of
> >potential performance because HP has not made the PA-
> >RISC 2.0 compilers available on the e3000.
> >
> >So, the ratio could be more like 24:1 than 12:1. .......
> >
> >Fortunately I imagine that the HotSpot Java compiler will
> >run the 8500 at it's "full" potential. So, to maximize your
> >A-class, start re-writing in Java...
> >
> >Paul Taffel
>
> These issues sound like EXCELLENT fodder for a long,
> protracted discussion at one of the Management
> Roundtables for HP World 2001, don't you think?
A good idea; EXCEPT: I hope we don't have to wait that
long for HP to realize they made a mistake in crippling the
A-Class e3000..... but if not before HPW, certainly there...
... I forgot about the 1.0 versus 2.0 compilers issue when I
composed my above message.... Paul is right: That makes
it significantly worse in at least some cases.
Also: Without trying to respond individually to comments
that essentially said HP did a good thing by bringing out the
A-Class: It was definitely a "good thing" to get the A-Class,
but note my focus was mostly on potential NEW customers
who do NOT have existing Image/SQL apps: The fact that
the A-Class is a nice new box for sites that are already using
the e3000 is (sorry) basically irrelevant to potential new
customers in their decision making process on picking a new
/ replacement platform: I still respectfully maintain that the
strengths of MPE and Image/SQL are NOT going to be able
to overcome the >= 10:1 or as Paul points out perhaps even
a >= 20:1 CPU "price-performance" advantage for an
equivalent 9000 running CPU-hungry apps with lots of
memory... You just can't sell that...
Ken Sletten
|
|
|