--Signature_Mon__20_Jun_2005_07_45_20_-0400_gd.cr+6IFicxEbv3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

> i have a SS20 with Dual 85MHz SuperSPARC II (those weren't supported
> by SUN IIRC because of the huge amount of heat they generate) which is
> faster than a 200MHz HyperSPARC dualie of a friend. as a rule of thumb
> one can say that the SuperSPARC II is at least as fast as a HyperSPARC
> with twice the clock.

That bad? I've read that HyperSPARCs do less work-per-clock than
SuperSPARCs but I thought that's compensated by their much higher clock
speed. ( reminds me of the Pentium 4... )

> so best bet would be a U2 with UltraSPARC II (300 or 400MHz, the
> latter ones far more expensive than the 300MHz). avoid UltraSPARC I.
> and pray for the NetBSD guys to get SMP running on sparc64 ;)

Yes, I have an U1 (UltraSPARC I) and a U10 (UltraSPARC IIi) here, the
U10 runs at ~twice the clock as the U1. Depending on what you do with
them the speed difference can be anything between the U10 barely beating
the U1 and the U10 running circles around the U1. Purely CPU-bound tasks
will be much faster on the U10 though.
So I guess an U2 with UltraSPARC II CPUs would be the most sensible
choice here ;)=20

have fun
Michael

--Signature_Mon__20_Jun_2005_07_45_20_-0400_gd.cr+6IFicxEbv3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (NetBSD)

iQEVAwUBQrasUMpnzkX8Yg2nAQIbzgf/fzHmKPE8/HBdlk7fd68JcZtv9G5FOQNh
cumPMa77mEi2eVMYBrKmYe4eAP3HXhLznTT4V/6sJwVm4E57FXQCjyBG4w+1xrk2
UfzoGw+bA6D3gRlMVQMBOVo0nSvv1tzuUyzuq4ltdAjZFi8+agU4qfm4IpTlGYxN
S27XsjLIUD5TqjHQjm4FxG9QDAQkF6k6IMhckxupTcPCyED1XenKdWAngkP3ZpQJ
RpjeB40MZzwglLw2D2sxMidmKP3O06JiLlPbu83hVwakfyi6ypvg06VamVYwQSsw
r7+mLuo59RysJEFTjRyQ7xgLzuobEK6hn5mDr/y85Wdn2vlEK5YeWw==
=0JJJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature_Mon__20_Jun_2005_07_45_20_-0400_gd.cr+6IFicxEbv3--