Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Nov 2009 22:10 UTC
"IBM likes to go on and on about the transaction processing power and I/O bandwidth of its System z mainframes, but now there is a new and much bigger kid on the block. Its name is the Power Systems IH supercomputing node, based on the company's forthcoming Power7 processors and a new homegrown switching system that blends optical and copper interconnects. The Power7 IH node was on display at the SC09 supercomputer trade show last week in Portland, Oregon, and El Reg was on hand to get the scoop from the techies who designed the iron. This server node is the heart of the 20 petaflop 'Blue Waters' supercomputer being installed at the University of Illinois."
Thread beginning with comment 396903
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-02
It's a matter of perspective. As the clock speeds ramped up, the older versions do lack. However, the newer versions were quite impressive (like in the Mac Mini, later Macbooks, and now Freescale SoCs)...but the performance/watt, much like the Atom, is predicated on keeping the speed and voltage down, and thus the performance ceiling low. If you hunt benchmarks on the 'net, newer Macbook G4s are neck and neck with Atoms, using chips that are much older, and physically much bigger.
The G5 (970) was competitive, but not spectacular in any way, and it wasn't worth it for IBM to try to keep it up, as a part for Apple. It was really good in terms of throughput, but the K8 put the smack down on it in normal tasks (where, "smackdown," can be defined as, "this runs 5-10% faster on Linux/A64 v. OS X/G5, doesn't use much more power, and is way cheaper"), and it went downhill from there. Ironically, beefing up G4 (not based on a Power CPU), as Freescale did, might have been a better path to take, in hindsight.
Also, Apple cooked half their benchmarks, when they did the move. Many them were quite a ways off from what actual users could get. It's not that x86 are bad, but the G4 was quite a piece of work, and might still be in PC-like devices, updated with new names, if we had a fairer market.
RE[5]: Comment by strim
by tylerdurden on Mon 30th Nov 2009 17:51
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by strim"
Member since:2009-03-17
Except that is not the reality. The G4 pipeline was rather poorly partitioned, and the OOO structures were pretty mild. Both severely limited the scalation of the design. And that is exactly what happened.
A G4 is in no way shape or form comparable to a core2, even on a clock per clock basis.
RE[4]: Comment by strim
by Nicholas Blachford on Sun 29th Nov 2009 17:49
in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by strim"
Member since:2005-07-06
Steve Jobs said, in the 2006 MacWorld keynote, that Intel's Core Duo had 4x the performance/watt of the PowerPC chips they were using.
The numbers he gave place the G4 doing a tad better than 1/4th the performance/watt, and the G5 doing a little worse than 1/4th.
The numbers he gave place the G4 doing a tad better than 1/4th the performance/watt, and the G5 doing a little worse than 1/4th.
They were not comparing like with like. They were comparing a high end desktop chip with a mobile chip, a bit of a dodgy comparison.
As for the G4, same thing, they were comparing a new Intel with an old G4.
They also completely forgot to include PA Semi's chip, which is understandable because it would have completely destroyed their argument, it had better per/Watt than the Core2.
There is a word for this sort of thing, it's called marketing.
RE[5]: Comment by strim
by Drumhellar on Sun 29th Nov 2009 18:42
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by strim"
Member since:2005-07-12
They were comparing a high end desktop chip with a mobile chip,
He wasn't talking about desktop chips. Apple's Core Duo debut was in laptops, so it was a like with like comparion.
And even if Steve Jobs stretched the truth about performance, as he frequently does, the performance/watt is still significantly higher.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
The third and final WWDC product I want to talk about is - of course - OS X 10.9 Mavericks. While iOS 7 was clearly the focus of this year's WWDC, its venerable desktop counterpart certainly wasn't left behind. Apple announced OS X 10.9 Mavericks, the first OS X release not to carry the name of a big cat.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
We already talked about iOS 7 yesterday (after a night of sleep, it's only looking worse and worse - look at this, for Fiona's sake!), so now it's time to talk about the downright stunning and belly flutters-inducing new Mac Pro. As former owner and huge, huge, huge fan of the PowerMac G4 Cube - I haven't been this excited about an Apple product since, well, I would say the iMac G4. This is the Apple I used to love.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Apple held its big keynote event thing at WWDC earlier this evening, but since I was away with friends I've had to read up on it later in the evening. The company announced iOS 7, OS X 10.9 Mavericks, and they gave a preview of the new Mac Pro. Especially the Mac Pro impressed me, and while iOS 7's new Holo/Metro-inspired theme looks messy and garish to me, I do commend Apple for finally breaking the mold. This news item will focus on iOS 7 - I'll dive into the Mac Pro and OS X 10.9 tomorrow (it's late here now).
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
And yes, the PRISM scandal is far, far from over. More and more information keeps leaking out, and the more gets out, the worse it gets. The companies involved have sent out official statements - often by mouth of their CEOs - and what's interesting is that not only are these official statements eerily similar to each other, using the same terms clearly designed by lawyers, they also directly contradict new reports from The New York Times. So, who is lying?
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
This story is getting bigger and bigger. Even though most Americans probably already knew, it is now official: the United States government, through its National Security Agency, is collecting the communications and data of all American citizens, and of non-Americans using American services, through a wide collaboration with the large companies in technology, like Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and so on. Interestingly enough, the NSA itself, as well as the US government, have repeatedly and firmly denied this massive spying on Americans and non-Americans took place at all.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Ah, patents - the never-ending scourge of the technology industry. Whether wielded by companies who don't actually make any products, or large corporations who abuse them because they can't compete in the market place or because they're simply jerks, they do the industry a huge disservice and are simply plain dangerous. According to The Wall Street Journal (circumvention link), president Obama is about to take several executive actions to address patent trolls - which may seem like a good idea, but I am very worried that all this will do is strengthen the positions of notorious patent system abusers such as Apple and Microsoft.
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
With version 13.05, the developers of the Genode OS Framework take measures to ensure that Genode continues to scale well with a growing number of users and the steadily broadening platform coverage. Further highlights are the improved SoC support for Exynos 5, OMAP4, Raspberry Pi, i.MX, and new components for realizing headless systems.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
At the D11 conference, Apple CEO Tim Cook once again took the stage to be interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher. While most of the interview can be replicated by picking and reading 10 random Apple fanblog stories - there were still a number of very interesting things that warrant some closer scrutiny.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
So, the Xbox One disaster continues. Microsoft's policy for dealing with the used games market has reportedly leaked - and it's a clear and direct attack to destroy the used games market. Prices for used games will be set at the retail value of a new game, and retailers have to hook into Microsoft's computer systems and comply with Microsoft's terms and conditions.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
At an event earlier today, Microsoft unveiled the next Xbox - the third model, but confusingly named Xbox One. The big focus was TV, integrated Kinect, and all the other stuff we all expected to be forced down our throats. I think it took them 25 minutes to actually come to what should be the core of the story: gaming. Nothing groundbreaking in the gaming department, except for how Microsoft intends to handle the used games market and borrowing games from friends: pay up, buddy!More Features »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2005-07-12
You haven't been paying attention, then.
Steve Jobs said, in the 2006 MacWorld keynote, that Intel's Core Duo had 4x the performance/watt of the PowerPC chips they were using.
The numbers he gave place the G4 doing a tad better than 1/4th the performance/watt, and the G5 doing a little worse than 1/4th.