To: Dan3 who wrote (167763 ) 7/9/2002 11:24:35 AM From: wanna_bmw Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894 Dan, Re: "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." How carefully did you look at the benchmarks? The fastest 4-way 1GHz Alpha with 16GB of memory can only service 420 users. Itanium 2 has a 12% advantage at a much lower cost.sap.com Re: "A big Sun sparc supports 7000 users (all from your link)." So what? You want to compare a multi-million dollar 128 processor Sparc system (from Fujitsu, not Sun) against a sub-$50,000 quad processor Itanium 2 system, be my guest. Re: "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." How do you define "mediocre"? Itanium 2 beats every single contender out there, including Power4 on many applications. Re: "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." Guess what? The industry is already doing everything they can to support Itanium 2, from building the platforms, to porting the software, to creating the OS, to writing the drivers, etc. And they didn't have to dump a single line of code from their high volume businesses to do it. PA-RISC and Alpha died because HP and Compaq rightly saw that they were inferior products, unable to compete in the long term. Itanium 2 beats PA-RISC - by quite a lot! Itanium 2 also beats Alpha - by a significant margin! I haven't seen the next generation of these two architectures, but as I suspected, the newly merged HPQ continues to miss schedules in getting those chips out to market, like they've done for the past several years (even before Intel acquired the rights to some of the technology, if that's what you are thinking). Sorry, but your "concerns" on performance continue to be unfounded, just like all your other "concerns". wbmw