Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Aug 2008 22:13 UTC, submitted by rom508
Permalink for comment 328338
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-07
There is simply no SPARC processor which is suitable for workstation, so this is just logical consequence, that Sun quits this market. SPARC processors have geat thorughput, but low single core performance, so as long as lot of workstation software is not multithreaded and does not need lot of thoughput, but relies on great floating-point and integer performance, SPARC-based workstation is useless. The only argument for SPARC-workstation is to use it for development of software, but Itanium shows that it is possible to have servers only and still be able to do software development.
What is advantage of workstation compared with a CITRIX-based solution anyway? Decent graphics performance, but did SPARC-based workstation had decent graphics performance?
So RIP SPARC-workstation. Used them a lot in university and had a Blade100 at work (EDA). Now we are all CITRIX-based and Linux-servers are running circles around SPARC-servers when it comes to heavy calculations, but when it comes to lot of GUI work, SPARC-server still rules.
Anton
Edited 2008-08-28 06:38 UTC