Article View: comp.arch
Article #3116Re: R6000 vs BIT SPARC
From: Peter K. Rathmann
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1989 23:35
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1989 23:35
14 lines
1208 bytes
1208 bytes
Ok, R6000 vs BIT SPARC is too early to call, but other comparisons might be even more interesting. The R6000 based system was billed in the popular press as a mainframe, so does anyone have any numbers comparing it to more typical mainframes like the IBM 3090 or big Amdahl machines? Extrapolating from the xfroot numbers indicates that the R6000 should be pretty competitive, at least for floating point. Has anyone checked it for a business data processing mix of databases and COBOL? If the R6000 can compete with classic mainframes on their home ground, I might start believing this talk about killer micros. -Peter
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1989Nov22.233508.20446@Neon.Stanford.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!decwrl!shelby!neon!rathmannReferences:
<1989Nov21.015953.13817@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> <14900002@hpdml93.HP.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!decwrl!shelby!neon!rathmann From: rathmann@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Peter K. Rathmann) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: R6000 vs BIT SPARC Message-ID: <1989Nov22.233508.20446@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Date: 22 Nov 89 23:35:08 GMT References: <1989Nov21.015953.13817@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> <14900002@hpdml93.HP.COM> Sender: USENET News System <news@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Reply-To: rathmann@eclipse.Stanford.EDU (Peter K. Rathmann) Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Lines: 14