Re: Trying to compare E450 to Intel Server

CJT <abujlehc_at_prodigy.net> wrote in message news:<409FBEC3.8040804_at_prodigy.net>...
> Mark Bole wrote:
>
> > G Dahler wrote:
> >
> >> "Andrew Hardy" <junkmail@[127.0.0.1]> a écrit dans le message de
> >> news:c7nm36$5qe$1_at_sun-cc204.lut.ac.uk...
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> We're using an E450: 'Sun Enterprise 450 (4 X UltraSPARC-II 296MHz)'
> >>> with 1Gb of RAM as a development platform.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> We recently replaced a similar UE 450 2Gb RAM machine by a Sun 280R
> >> (1.2 Ghz
> >> single CPU, 5Gb RAM) and found the machine to perform as good (if not
> >> better) than the 450. Technology (eg. disks) as improved a lot since the
> >> 450, that gives a good boost in performance.
> >>
> >> I would not run anything else than solaris or Linux on the Intel
> >> Platform,
> >> otherwise, your CPU will be busy managing the GUI and useless stuff
> >> instead
> >> of your database. But other people may actually like windows for
> >> whatever
> >> reason (maybe they have MSFT stock :-)
> >>
> >>
> >
> > If you go to a site like Dell or Red Hat, you should be able to find
> > some white papers with Oracle performance test comparisons to Sun (and
> > probably other competing vendors).
> >
> > We have done several tests of both batch and transactional processing
> > and found that a shiny new Intel/Linux box vastly out-performs the
> > five-year-old Sun/Solaris hardware we use. Vendor support is a
> > different and less positive story, however...
> >
> > --Mark Bole
> >
> >
>
> I bet a shiny new Sun would outperform a five year old Sun, too.

particularly one with 4 Opterons under the hood, with a penguin inside.

Pd Received on Mon May 10 2004 - 16:22:21 CDT