Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!brtph3!brchh104!brchs1!bnr.ca!rice.edu!sun-spots-request
From: seamans@seaimage.nlm.nih.gov (James R. Seamans)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun
Subject: System Differences
Keywords: Hardware
Message-ID: <1719@brchh104.bnr.ca>
Date: 21 Feb 91 20:15:00 GMT
Sender: news@brchh104.bnr.ca
Organization: Sun-Spots
Lines: 86
Approved: Sun-Spots@rice.edu
X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 19:26:28 GMT
X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 45, message 4
X-Note: Submissions: sun-spots@rice.edu, Admin: sun-spots-request@rice.edu

I'm not really sure how to begin this thread of discussion, but I'll try
anything twice. I'll try to kept it short.

Here at the National Library of Medicine, we have a large Sun shop with a
diversity of systems. In October of 1990, a requirement for five new Sparc
systems was identified and analysis of the missions for these systems was
started.

Cut through the **** 

Two Sparc vendors were identified who could supply the needed hardware. Of
course one was Sun Microsystems and the other was Solbourne Computer.
Solbourne provided us a S4000 system to test our software and generally
see the box. Sun had provided a Sparc 2 system which was in the building
but we did not know it, since it was in another division. I later took our
executable and related files to the local Sun office to be tested.

System Architecture:

Solbourne S4000
Sparc Panasonic MN10501 25.5 MIPS, 1.7 MFLOPS, 12 SPECmarks
	16 MByte of memory 207 MB disk; running X window system.

Sun Sparc 2 4/75
Sun Sparc 2      28.5 MIPS, 4.2 MFLOPS, 21 SPECmarks
	16 MByte of memory 207 MB disk; running Openwindow system.

The software was a locally developed correlation program for image
processing. It has a significant amount of floating point operations and
was originally developed on a Sun 4/260. The program was compiled without
any optimization on the Sun 4/260 and the executable was run on each
system without any modifications.

Here are the timings for the different systems:

	Sun 4/260	3 hr 28 min
	Sun 4/75	1 hr 6 min
	S4000		1 hr 8 min

Question #1: 

If the Sun 4/75 has significantly better floating point operation than the
S4000, how come it only showed a 2 minute better time?

When the Systems Engineer from Sun saw the timing, he immediately wanted
and got a re-compile using the latest Sun un-bundled C compiler. He
utilized several optimizations to re-compile the program.

	re-running on:

		Sun 4/470	35 mins	(? 22 MIPS system )
		Sun 4/75	30 mins

Now, these were the timings I was expecting from the Sparc 2.

Question #2: 

Does this mean that the specifications Sun quotes is based on the
un-bundled C compiler and gives a false impression of the Sparc 2 system
speed?

Comparing comparable systems from both:

	16 Mb mem, 19"Color, 207M disk ( you know a standard box)
	Solbourne is $4000 less

Now,	Jump to the system we want to purchase:

	Solbourne 19" 24bit color 1280 x 1024
	Sun 21" 24bit color 1280 x 1024
	16 Mb memory
	rest of the system about the same

	At current pricing, Solbourne is $21,500 less than Sun.

Question #3 ....:

Who is Sun kidding?  Is the 2 extra inches worth $21500?  Have I missed
some hidden attribute of the Sun machine?  What is going on at Sun?  Are
they changing their name to IBM?

Caveat: No I have not had a chance to re-run on the Solbourne with an
un-bundled compiler but it WILL happen.

Jim Seamans,	Senior Computer Scientist
seamans@seaimage.nlm.nih.gov	(130.14.1.73)


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com