T3 announced

By: Jesper Frimann (jesperfrimann.delete@this.gmail.com), September 21, 2010 6:21 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
anon (anon@anon.com) on 9/21/10 wrote:
---------------------------
>someone (someone@somewhere.com) on 9/21/10 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>Max (nousefor@name.com) on 9/21/10 wrote:
>>---------------------------
>>>http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/173536
>>>
>>>some benchmarks:
>>>
>>>http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/sparc_t3_4_sets_world
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>gone is the 2x per core performance claim. we still will be getting 4 t3-2 boxen here.
>>
>>Sun used to release SPECint_rate numbers for its T chips.
>>I hope Oracle hasn't stopped this practice.
>
>I think the more general rule is that Sun only releases benchmark numbers when
>it makes them look good. I doubt this practice will have changed.

Jup if you look through the 8 benchmark results they have released then 6 of them are Oracle product benchmarks where you either has nothing to compare against or they are the first in a new category.

Then there is a SPECJVM2008 benchmark where they use a Peak value to compare to base values of the other submissions. There are all in all 6 other submissions with 3 being from SUN and 3 others being iMac's.

http://www.spec.org/jvm2008/results/jvm2008.html

The fastest system that they beat with 2% is a 2 Chip Nehalem-EP from SUN. Now that is 32 T3 cores versus 8 Nehalem-EP cores.

Then there is the SPECjEnterprise2010 benchmark which is pretty new. Total of 13 submissions. Here they claim to be the fastest submission. And well they aren't, as there aren't any differentiation between clustered and non clustered systems on the benchmark. So there is a multinode config that is faster. And Oracle also partition the T3-4 APP server into 8 domains that each run a separate Weblogic copy. So it's actually a clustered result. The database is also partitioned.
But this is a good submission, although they are throwing a lot more money after the benchmark than for example the power 750 they are comparing with in Max'es link.
And it's one of those benchmarks where there are many elements that makes it hard to figure out what you are actually comparing.

So generally.. hot air IMHO.

// Jesper
< Previous Post in ThreadNext Post in Thread >
TopicPosted ByDate
T3 announcedMax2010/09/21 03:42 AM
  T3 announcedsomeone2010/09/21 04:53 AM
    T3 announcedanon2010/09/21 05:05 AM
      T3 announcedlurker2010/09/21 06:11 AM
      T3 announcedJesper Frimann2010/09/21 06:21 AM
      T3 announcedPhil2010/09/21 11:59 PM
        T3 announcedMichael S2010/09/22 05:16 AM
  T3 announcedLinus Torvalds2010/09/21 06:15 AM
    T3 announcedanon2010/09/21 08:31 AM
      Transactional memory Paul A. Clayton2010/09/21 09:52 AM
        Transactional memory Linus Torvalds2010/09/21 11:21 AM
          Transactional memory Paul A. Clayton2010/09/23 06:30 AM
            Transactional memory Linus Torvalds2010/09/23 07:01 AM
              Transactional memory David Kanter2010/09/23 11:05 PM
                Transactional memory Linus Torvalds2010/09/24 06:59 AM
                  Transactional memory David Kanter2010/09/25 08:27 AM
                    'dynamic fallback'?Paul A. Clayton2010/09/25 10:28 AM
                      'dynamic fallback'?Linus Torvalds2010/09/25 12:23 PM
                        'dynamic fallback'?blaine2010/09/25 01:16 PM
                Cliff Click Jr. on Azul's HTMPaul A. Clayton2010/09/24 01:19 PM
              Transactional memory Foo_2010/09/24 02:08 AM
    T3 announcedblaine2010/09/21 10:43 AM
      no news from FujitsuMax2010/09/21 09:37 PM
Reply to this Topic
Name:
Email:
Topic:
Body: No Text
How do you spell avocado?