Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!sgi!shinobu!odin!merlin.asd.sgi.com!tj
From: tj@merlin.asd.sgi.com (tj)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
Subject: Re: 4D/35 vs. 4D/3xx
Message-ID: <1991Jan23.200539.19460@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Date: 23 Jan 91 20:05:39 GMT
References: <112@tcela.COM>
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Reply-To: tj@merlin.asd.sgi.com (tj)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Research & Development
Lines: 27

In article <112@tcela.COM>, tak@tcela.COM (Michael Takayama) writes:
> Looking through the latest UNIX Review (Jan 91), I noted that the 4D/340VGX
> is SPECmarked at 19.5 while the new 4D/35 is SPECmarked at 23 (pgs. 75 and
> 110, respectively).
> 
> OK, all you folks at SGI in ASD and ESD, given the price differential between
> the 4D/35 and 4D/3xx workstations, what is the *REAL* difference in compute
> performance (not graphics - it's pretty much a given that GTX and VGX 
> performance far exceed TG performance) between these systems (esp. 4D/35S 
> and 4D/310S)? 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- 
> Michael Takayama                                     email:  tak@tce.com
> Technical Support Manager
> TDI America


The performance differences between the 4D35 and 4D310 are correct. The price
difference is not because of performance, rather because of configurability.
The 310 is upgradeable through an eight processor system. It has more VME and
disk capability as well as faster I/O with IPI drives and up to 256MB of
memory instead of 128 on the 4D35.

Tom Jermoluk
ASD/SGI