🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9903@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> cquenel@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (48 more school days) writes:
>The point I always have to make whenever this comes up:
>
>Suppose for the sake of argument you have a single processor
>machine on one side and an 8 processor machine on the other side
>with each processor exactly equal to 1/8 of the larger CPU.
>Suppose the prices and total performances are equal.

Performance is an interesting problem.  What aspects of performance are
you measuring.  For me the only performance that matters is how quickly
the computer responds to my request.

Before I started using a Sequent S81 with 8 processors, I was using
an Intel 80386 based workstation running Xenix.  This workstation was
hooked into a LAN with typically 20 system processes running.  When I
went about my usual routine I would typically be running another 10
processes.  I was the only user on this workstation and response time
was very nice after being on an 18 user VAX 11/750.

The response time on the S81 with 8 Intel 80386 micorprocessors with
over 400 processes is much better than the single processor workstation
with less that 1/10th of the number of processes.

This analysis is based on how the system feels as opposed to any benchmark.

On the price side, I think you will find a Sequent Symmetry system
for 30 software engineers, much more cost effective than 30 workstations;
not to mention the additional cost of software and administration for eacht
workstation.

These are definitely my own opinions and not that of Sequent's.

Kirk Woods