home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!decwrl!csus.edu!netcomsv!mork!kemnitz
- From: kemnitz@netcom.com (Greg Kemnitz)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.hardware
- Subject: Re: need information on IPX vs. SPARC2
- Summary: homebrew benchmarks
- Message-ID: <_gnm40#.kemnitz@netcom.com>
- Date: 29 Jul 92 06:40:18 GMT
- References: <DODD.92Jul27082024@mycenae.cchem> <262@ftms.UUCP>
- Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <262@ftms.UUCP> brown@ftms.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
- >In article <DODD.92Jul27082024@mycenae.cchem> dodd@mycenae.cchem.berkeley.edu writes:
- ><
- ><Hello,
- ><
- >< I am in the market for a sun workstation. Originally I was going to get a
- ><SPARC2 but someone has told me that the IPX is faster and cheaper but less
- ><expandable. I would like to hear the net's opinion of the IPX.
- >
- >The IPX is NOT faster than the SS2. The SS2 is a little faster in Specmarks,
- >but not much. The SS2 is loaded with twice the memory and has twice the
- >context switches.
-
- My favorite benchmark is to run the Wisconsin DBMS benchmark on a public domain
- DBMS system we've hacked for use internally. This benchmark is a good test of
- both CPU speed and I/0. The SS2 is about 4% faster than the IPX on this
- test. Also, building the DBMS (a compilation of about 400 source files
- containing 165K lines of code) takes 40 minutes on either machine (using Sun
- ANSI C in a standalone configuration).
-
- Another thing about the IPX is you get the "no penalty" upgrade to the
- SS10 if you want, just like with the SS2. We bought the IPX.
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Greg Kemnitz | "I ran out of the room - I
- MultiMedia Information Systems Inc. | didn't want to be killed by a pile
- kemnitz@netcom.com | of VMS manuals" :-)
- |
- | --A friend at DEC Palo Alto in the Quake
-