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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (167755)	7/9/2002 3:59:11 AM
From: kapkan4u	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

<You previously linked to it several times in a vain attempt to exploit a weakness in the original Itanium, showing it to be on par with older Pentium III Xeon cores. But now the Itanium 2 gains 2.35x in performance over it's older sibling, allowing it to easily outperform competitive entries.> Unlike scientific apps that can't be easily broken into separate tasks, most server apps don't really care if you use one I2 or 2.35 PIIIs. Rack space and power consumption are much more important. You can fit 18 PIII blades in a single 3u 19 inch rackmount. I don't think that I2 can match the computing density of x86 for two more generations, even if x86 was standing still. There is not a single compelling reason for anybody but Intel to push I2 into the server space. It is obvious to me that IA-64 will fail. Kap

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (167755)	7/9/2002 8:50:55 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: Does this site ring a bell? LOL!!!! how carefully did you look at those benchmarks? An old 4-way Alpha server running 667mhz cpus supports 400 users while the latest and greatest Itanium with 16gig of Ram squeaks by it with 470. A big Sun sparc supports 7000 users (all from your link). The Itanic, when configured with a ton of memory and a lot of fast disk, will do OK on benchmarks that are dependent on a ton of memory and a lot of fast disk. It's also great for running Itanium binaries. I will grant you that Itanium II performance is not as embarrassingly horrible as was the performance of Itanium I - in fact, on the right benchmarks, it's made it up to mediocre. That should be all it takes to get the industry to dump decades of experience with other architectures and throw away millions of lines of code of custom business critical applications. Esperanto is a fine language, but it doesn't seem to have caught on, despite all of the benefits its supporters keep telling us about.