Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (69754)	8/24/1999 7:06:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573937

Ten and Thread - Article: 8-way servers pose dilemma for IT managers. 1) If Merced is so bad, what's the dilemma? :-) 2) Note both options presented are from the same chip vendor. zdnet.com 8-way servers pose IT dilemma Managers must decide whether to buy now or wait for 64-bit Merced machines By Sonia R. Lelii and Lisa Dicarlo, PC Week Online August 23, 1999 9:00 AM ET As server makers prepare to flood the market with eight-processor machines based on Intel Corp.'s Profusion chip set, IT managers have a tough decision to make: buy the 32-bit systems now or hold out for the 64-bit systems due next year. Compaq Computer Corp. introduced new Profusion-based servers at an event here last week. Intel expects an additional 20 or so OEMs to announce in the next few weeks similar servers equipped with eight 32-bit Pentium III Xeon processors. But it won't be long—mid-2000—before Intel's 64-bit Merced processors are available. As a result, IT managers are weighing the cost of rolling out Xeon machines that may have to be integrated with Merced-based machines a year from now vs. the cost of delaying the purchase of more powerful servers. Some believe the pressure to meet present-day needs will drive many to choose today's eight-way systems. "People buy hardware based on current needs," said Lester Morgan, IT manager with the National Football League, in New York. The server depreciation schedule at the Online Computer Library Center Inc. happens to coincide with the planned release of Merced-based systems. However, Jerry Lynch, OCLC director of operations, said many of his counterparts at other organizations will stick with what is familiar—32-bit systems—rather than wait for Merced. "It's the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know," said Lynch, in Dublin, Ohio. That said, he added that those who choose the eight-way Xeon server route will be hesitant to jump into 64-bit computing. "Unless they can overcome the total cost of ownership [expense], the 32-bit eight-way is going to have a nice ride at the expense of Merced," Lynch said. Others say the slow adoption path to new architectures will ensure a long shelf life for eight-way Xeon servers. "I don't think that Merced will make a big impact on the market probably until its second generation," the NFL's Morgan said. Others agree and say greater demand is expected for Intel's second-generation 64-bit processor, code-named McKinley, which is due in 2001. A year ago, server makers said they would have Merced-based systems by 2000, but of late, product road maps point to 2001 and 2002, which indicates that they'll likely use the 64-bit McKinley, according to Amir Ahari, an analyst with International Data Corp., in Framingham, Mass. Still, some OEMs do not plan an aggressive Merced road map. The complex ity and newness of the architecture, coupled with the ensuing validation process, will make such servers irrelevant to the masses until at least 2001, according to one Compaq official. "We will still be selling a lot of 32-bit servers in 2001," said Paul Santeler, vice president of enterprise servers at the Houston company.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (69754)	8/24/1999 7:59:00 PM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573937

Tenchusatsu, <By the way, I'm ordering an 810 motherboard right now for a $650 computer I'm building for a friend.> I thought benchmarks show that 810 cuts the system performance by couple of speed grades compared to non-Whitney implementation. The reviews made me think that Whitney is not suitable for anything more than $399 or $499 machine. Or, are you getting the processor for free and don't care for the performance drop? Chuck

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (69754)	8/25/1999 1:32:00 PM
From: herb will	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573937

Tenchusatsu, Regarding: "What were they running? Native Merced code, or translated PA-RISC instructions?" Since no one else has commented about this as far as I can tell, I thought you might be interested in the following comment by Ken Kroeker, senior technical consultant at the HP's Partner Support Organization. "As has already been suggested in another post, the performance numbers I stated at HPWorld99 were PA mode numbers. For Clarity this means PA binaries running in translated mode on IA-64. The original presentation slide can be found in the HPWorld99 procedings." x21.deja.com Won"t there be more about about Merced benchmarks at the Intel Developer Forum beginning August 31? Herb