Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!visual1.jhuapl.edu!dave From: dave@visual1.jhuapl.edu (Dave Weintraub) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix Subject: Re: IBM 6000 vs HP 9000 series 700 Message-ID: <1991Jun25.214124.29573@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> Date: 25 Jun 91 21:41:24 GMT References: <1991Jun25.160925.53455@eagle.wesleyan.edu> Sender: news@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (USENET News System) Reply-To: dave@visual1.jhuapl.edu (Dave Weintraub) Organization: Johns Hopkins University Lines: 40 In article <1991Jun25.160925.53455@eagle.wesleyan.edu>, hoberoi@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes: |> Hi, |> here goes: |> any comparisons of RS6000 530/540 etc with the HP Apollo 9000 series |> 700 machines ? |> |> HP claims better SPECmarks for all the comparable models |> |> SPEC IBM 320 HP 720 IBM 530 HP 730 |> mark 24.6 55.5 32 72.2 |> int 16.3 39.0 20.4 51.0 |> fp 32.4 70.2 43.4 91.0 |> |> |> I would be interested in the performance AIX vs HP-UX. How better/worse |> is the OS. |> |> graphics- IBM offers the SGI Personal Iris board for the 500 series |> machines. HP has the T1/T2 based boards. How do the two compare ? |> |> thanks |> Himanshu hoberoi@beaver.wesleyan.edu |> No answer, but a comment: Beware of HP's claims. Their machine is *hot*, but they tend to be into hyperboil (?sp). See Dvorak's column in PC Magazine, where he reports HP's claims of a 720 vs a Cray, and interprets these with a wise ton of salt. The HP videotape I saw cited a SAS developer compairing SAS on the HP versus SAS on a 3090-600E. Only problem is, SAS/C (in which SAS is now written) does not, to the best of my knowledge, take advantage of the IBM vector facility, multitasking, or QSAM chaining; the comparison was a little skewed. I would also use the caveats suggested by Dvorak, in terms of scalability of the comparisons. Mind you, I repeat: the 720 is a *hot* machine! And the PC simulator beats pcsim by miles.