Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!west!bottomdog!martinb From: martinb@bottomdog.East.Sun.COM (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge/Gatwick) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sequent Subject: Re: obsolete Sequent software Message-ID: <1469@west.West.Sun.COM> Date: 1 Mar 91 17:36:24 GMT References: <124108@uunet.UU.NET> <1991Mar01.163348.24172@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU> Sender: news@west.West.Sun.COM Reply-To: Martin.Baines@UK.Sun.Com Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd Lines: 47 In article <1991Mar01.163348.24172@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>, johnm@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (John Matzka) writes: [delete comments regarding fitness of Sequent s/w and followups] |> I would be interested to see you put 500+ simultaneous users on a dozen suns. I really couldn't resist this one: 500 users on a dozen Suns = 500/12 Users per system = 41.67 users per system. Let's call it 50 users per system to be fair :-) Each SS400 = 22 MIPS => 0.44 MIPS/user Say the Sequent had 30 processors rated at 5 MIPS each i.e. 30*5 = 150 MIPS => 0.3 MIPS/user So it look's like the dozen Suns would give you *more* power per user than a single Sequent. For the typical s/w dev. load a SPARCsystem 400 would eat this load level for breakfast. Heck there are people running over 100 users (happily) on a SPARCserver2. Ok it varies with work load etc etc., but for more details contact your nearest Sun sales office :-) Needless to say these are my views not Sun's... +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | "You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment" | | | | Martin Baines | | Consultant | | Sun Microsystems Ltd | | 306 Science Park | | Cambridge CB4 4WG | | UK | | | | Phone Email | | UK: 0223 420421 JANET: Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun | | International: +44 223 420421 Other UK: Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk | | Internet: Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+