Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!brtph3!brchh104!brchs1!bnr.ca!rice.edu!sun-spots-request
From: dav@genisco.gtc.com (David L. Markowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun
Subject: SPARCengine 1E performance (Was: Sparcengine 1E serial pinout needed)
Keywords: Hardware
Message-ID: <956@brchh104.bnr.ca>
Date: 30 Dec 90 01:04:00 GMT
Sender: news@brchh104.bnr.ca
Organization: Sun-Spots
Lines: 40
Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu
X-Original-Date: Thu, 27 Dec 90 13:13:52 PST
X-Refs:  Original: v9n390, Replies: v9n403 v9n405
X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 9, Issue 414, message 1
X-Note: Submissions: sun-spots@rice.edu, Admin: sun-spots-request@rice.edu

fitz@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Kerien Fitzpatrick) writes:

>As a general note, the performance of the SPARC 1E was disappointing at
>best.  Comparing the same code between a diskless 1+ with 12Mb memory and
>the diskfull (yes, I was using a second ethernet board) SPARC 1E with 8Mb
>- the code rmore than three times as fast on the 1+.

This is hardly a fair comparison!  The 1+ is 15.8 MIPS vs. the 1E's 12.5
MIPS, and 4.0.3 is known to be a dog with only 8 MB, especially if you run
a window system.  Also the ECC RAM is slower, but is ECC (important in
many applications).  Try comparing a 1E with a combo board with 8 MB
additional in SIMMs on it to yield 12 MB total vs. a SPARCstation 1 also
running 4.0.3.

>A nice alternative
>if you need VME is to use one of the SBus <-> VMEbus adaptors.  When we
>swapped out the SPARC 1E with a 1+ motherboard and Solflower's SBus <->
>VMEbus adaptor (and kept the local disk) we picked up performance from the
>diskless 1+ (as would be expected).  Given University discount, the 1+
>motherboard + Solflower costs less than the SPARC 1E + 4Mb ECC memory
>board.

This is true.  Only use a 1E where you need a 1E, such as in ruggedized
MIL VME boxes (like we build).  Only use ECC RAM when you need it.  An
alternative is (now) available.

>The SPARC 1E is a good idea, the implementation leaves a lot to be
>desired.  We are going with the motherboards + Solflower because of easy
>(and cheap) memory upgrade, three SBus slots, price, performance, and
>retaining standard SunOS (I've heard 4.1e will be ready first quarter 91).
>Beyond that you still have the nice audio I/O port (great on a mobile
>robot....you can record audio for playback....have the errorhandler trap -
>AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!! another bug!).

The combo board also provides two Sbus slots.  The rest of your comments
are very accurate.  Update them now, and compare the 1E vs. a SS2!

	David L. Markowitz
	Genisco Technology Corporation
	dav@gtc.com