512Kb or 1Mb cache??

Article View: comp.sys.sun.hardware

Article #3221

Back to comp.sys.sun.hardware Previous Next

#3221

From: Michael Kraus
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 00:00

32 lines
1587 bytes

Hi,

We're looking into the purchase of an Ultra 2 or Ultra 3000 server, 
and have come across a huge difference in the price of their CPUs.

The 167 Mhz Ultra Sparc chips with 512 Kb cache for the Ultra 2s
cost $AUS 8,200 and ...

The 167 Mhz Ultra Sparc chips with 1024 Kb cache for the Ultra 3000s
cost $AUS 19,700!

Thats a difference of $AUS 11,500, for 512Kb cache.  

Is an extra 512 Kb cache really worth the extra $AUS 11K.  I know that
the E3000 has much better I.O. performance than an E2, but this 
$AUS 23, 000 price difference in the CPUs alone (dual CPU config.) is
a real budget breaker.

Can anybody tell me why the price of a CPU would more than double
because the cache size doubles?


Thanks,

Michael Kraus
Senior GIS Officer
Mapping & Geographic Information
Queensland DPI Forestry
Australia

mkraus@qfgis2.fh.dpi.qld.gov.au

Technical Details

Message-ID: <33015CB9.4EEC@qfgis2.fh.dpi.qld.gov.au>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f4671,49a802f6f2c4ad6b,start
X-Google-Attributes: gidf4671,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d053,49a802f6f2c4ad6b,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d053,public
From: Michael Kraus <mkraus@qfgis2.fh.dpi.qld.gov.au>
Subject: 512Kb or 1Mb cache??
Date: 1997/02/12
Message-ID: <33015CB9.4EEC@qfgis2.fh.dpi.qld.gov.au>
X-Deja-AN: 218195418
Sender: news@planet.mh.dpi.qld.gov.au
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: 131.242.72.243
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Queensland DPI Forestry
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: mkraus@qfgis2.fh.dpi.qld.gov.au
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.hardware,aus.computers.sun
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)