Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpfcso!hppad!hart
From: hart@hppad.waterloo.hp.com (Tony Hart)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: HP 700 series multi-user performance?
Message-ID: <1050011@hppad.waterloo.hp.com>
Date: 25 Apr 91 18:29:15 GMT
References: <29280004@teecs.UUCP>
Organization: HP Panacom Div Waterloo ON Canada
Lines: 32

In comp.sys.hp, jgm@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (John Mcbride) writes:

> I would look into connecting the X-terminals HP just announced to a
> Snakes.  I think the performance would be better than a 386 or 486
> PC. (Of course, comparing X-terminals to PCs as about as great of an apples 
> to oranges comparison as you can get, but I thought I would make it anyway.)

> John McBride

Here's at least one data point, demonstrated at the press conference for the
new HP 700/RX X terminals:

A HP 9000/720 was used as the compute server for three HP 700/RX 19Ca color 
X terminals. A standalone color SPARCStation 2 was used for comparison 
purposes. All three terminals and the SPARCStation simultaneously ran an 
identical McDonnell Douglas Unigraphics CAD/CAM application.

Even running three copies of the application, the HP configuration was 30% 
faster than the single copy running on the standalone SUN. The cost per seat
of the SUN workstation was about 50% more expensive than the HP solution.

Bear in mind that this was the least-powerful Snakes machine and the
most-powerful SUN. If you don't need SPARCStation 2-level performance, you can
add more X terminals and still get good average performance (peak performance
will come close to that of a standalone 720).

Tony Hart,
Panacom Automation Division,
Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Ltd.

All opinions expressed are my own and do not reflect an official statement of
the Hewlett-Packard Company.