Re: suggestions for udb

["Wes Bauske" <wsb paralleldata com>]

"Paul B. Brown" wrote:
> 
> > Besides which, this old argument of "x is just as fast as Alpha" always
> > conveniently forgets that a) Alpha was there first, in terms of speed,
> > and b) Alpha isn't going to stand still, it's been in GHz testing for
> > some time now.  So, who cares what's fastest today?  It doesn't mean
> > a thing, unless it's kept in perspective.
> 
> These are all valid points.  I was actually wanting arguments from the
> crowd that can go either way but decided on Alpha.  Why?  What fact(s)
> persuaded then that Alpha is the way to go?
> 

DS10's. Best bang for the buck as far as Alphas are
concerned. Now if they would just use the higher speed 
processors in them...

Actually, the newest Intels at SPECfp95 around 30 and SPECint95
around 35 are actually quite respectable FP systems.

If you're curious, look for the Compaq SP750 or the Intel OR840.

I'm looking for an Intel VC820 board with a 600 or 667mhz
Coppermine chip for test purposes. One report I saw showed
the RDRAM subsystem poduced a memory bandwidth of 1.2GB/sec.
Quite respectable. The SPEC numbers have advanced considerably
with the latest chipsets.(820/840)


Wes