Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!jarthur!lucy.claremont.edu!jack From: jack@lucy.claremont.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Next, 40, Sparc, 2 Message-ID: <1990Nov19.173120.1@lucy.claremont.edu> Date: 20 Nov 90 01:31:20 GMT References: <1990Nov12.135515@Atherton.COM> <11090@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <30017@boulder.Colorado.EDU> Sender: news@jarthur.Claremont.EDU Organization: Harvey Mudd College Lines: 71 In article <30017@boulder.Colorado.EDU>, fozzard@alumni.colorado.edu (Richard Fozzard) writes: > This is just the sort of uninformed invective that prejudices many folks > against the NeXT. I have been interested in getting NeXTs into our > operation, have used one for a couple of months, had public demos, > been to NUGs, etc. Invariably, the NeXT NuTS have spouted these sorts > of idiocies and alienated my superiors and other decision-makers around here. > > [1] "Squeezing blood from the sparc turnip" > This statement would be better applied to the aging 68xxx CISC architecture, > not the deliberately *scalable* RISC SPARC design. > > [2] "28.5 MIPS is not particularly meaningful" > Pretty lame. Have you actually *seen* one of these process a postscript > file or do a ray-trace or even just launch a simple application? I have, and > they really embarass even an '040 NeXT. Here at NOAA, we do climate simulations > that can take days - don't tell anyone around here that 28 MIPS isn't > meaningful. > I don't wish to start a flame war (although its a little late for that) but I want to point out that NeXT users are not alone in thinking that the SPARCStation 2 is not a particularly good computer for the money. The quotes that follow are from UNIX Today!, November 12, 1990, page 88: It appears that Sun is able to come close to the integer performance of our RS/6000, but to do so, they require a 40-MHZ clock rate, versus the 20 MHz on our POWERStation 320 ---Judy Radlinsky, IBM They're running that thing at 40 MHz generating 28 MIPS. That's anemic. That's bad. That's terrible. ---Paul Bemis, program manager, HP/Apollo They're basically coming up to parity with the DECStation 5000 now. And we're in the middle of our next generation of product development. ---Charlie Giorgetti, marketing manager, DEC (Noting that the 2GX is still offering wireframe graphics). That's just not something we view as competitive in the graphics marketplace. (Talking about the 2GS and 2GT). They don't have an affordable starting point. ---Mark Perry, exec. v.p., Silcon Graphics At 40 MHz the SPARC Chip appears to close to the edge of its performance. How much faster can you push the clock speed? 60 MHz? 80 MHz? Another problem is when you begin to up the clock speeds you naturally raise the cost of the other components and wind up with a more expensive system. Sun may be making a mistake by sticking to the SPARC architecture. And while it is nice to be binary compatiable, it can be the kiss of death (look at VAX/VMS which recently embarked on a program for a new architecture). I think that it would mistake for NeXT to stay with the 68XXX architecture (88XXX might be a good choice) for very much longer. And NeXT has not, to my knowledge, made any public commitment to staying with the 68XXX unlike SUN. For some users, there is a real need for speed. And I don't belive that 2 (or even 3) machines at 15 MIPS is equal to a machine running at 30 MIPS. And for some applications (weather simulations are just one) you need all the speed you can get. However, right now, I think that 15 MIPS is adequate for the average user (This could change with Open Systems). But if I were looking for a box at about 25 Mips I would not get a SPARCStation 2. There are a number of other Boxes (Magnum 3000, DECStation 5000, RISC/6000) that look at lot more attractive in that price range. ---Jack Jack@Hmcvax (Bitnet) jack@hmcvax.claremont.edu (Internet) jack@134.173.4.32 (also Internet)