UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Alan Stang » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00



Hello all,

While checking out the new Pentium III announcement from Intel,
I noticed the SPEC performance numbers looked quite good.

The 733 Mhz PIII had SpecINT95 = 35.6 and SpecFP95 = 30.4

The 450 Mhz UltraSparc II has SpecINT95 = 19.7 and SpecFP95 = 27.

<Insert here the usual essay on the limitations of benchmarks, etc>

I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
again?  I'm hoping that we don't have to go through the same problems as
with the SuperSparc.

It's one thing to be slow compared to the Alpha or the HP cpu's.  But
being slower than Intel and AMD?  That hurts.  And the difference is
only going to get much worse as AMD and Intel are rather aggressively
pushing performance and price.

A quick check of the UltraSparc III web page estimates a 600 Mhz part
delivering 35 SpecINT95 and 60 SpecFP95.  That's with 8MB of L2 cache.
The PIII numbers above are obtained with 256K of L2 cache.  The
estimates are from October 6,1997.
(See http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/9710/sunflash.971006.1.html)

Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
shipping for some time now.

--

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Philip Bro » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00



>Hello all,

>While checking out the new Pentium III announcement from Intel,
>I noticed the SPEC performance numbers looked quite good.

>The 733 Mhz PIII had SpecINT95 = 35.6 and SpecFP95 = 30.4

>The 450 Mhz UltraSparc II has SpecINT95 = 19.7 and SpecFP95 = 27.
>..

>I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
>again?

err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

Quote:>Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
>shipping for some time now.

http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/roadmap/
actuall claims that there wont be faster versions of the US-II.
You'll pretty much have to wait for ultrasparc III .
Which will supposedly be ... Umm... now-ish.

--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]

The word of the day is mispergitude

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Boris Goldber » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00


oh, yes, Sparc keeps falling behind Intel, let alone HP, DEC.



> >Hello all,

> >While checking out the new Pentium III announcement from Intel,
> >I noticed the SPEC performance numbers looked quite good.

> >The 733 Mhz PIII had SpecINT95 = 35.6 and SpecFP95 = 30.4

> >The 450 Mhz UltraSparc II has SpecINT95 = 19.7 and SpecFP95 = 27.
> >..

> >I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
> >again?

> err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

> >Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
> >shipping for some time now.

> http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/roadmap/
> actuall claims that there wont be faster versions of the US-II.
> You'll pretty much have to wait for ultrasparc III .
> Which will supposedly be ... Umm... now-ish.

> --
> [Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
> [ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]

> The word of the day is mispergitude

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by maxwell.. » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00


The AMD Athlon 650Mhz which is already available has
better numbers than the UltraSparc 440Mhz:

AMD: CINT95: 29.4  CFP95: 22.6(baseline)

Ultra 10 (440Mhz): CINT95: 18.1 CFP95: 22.7 (19.8 baseline)

I don't know if the Athlon (or its MB) will work with Solaris.

I would love to stick with Solaris Intel, but we must make our
machines last for 4-5 years and the half-hearted support Sun
gives Solaris x86 does not give you me a warm fuzzy feeling
for the future, which is why the last machine we bought
was an Ultra Axi 333Mhz.

Robert Mullenax

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Alan Stang » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00




> >Hello all,

> >While checking out the new Pentium III announcement from Intel,
> >I noticed the SPEC performance numbers looked quite good.

> >The 733 Mhz PIII had SpecINT95 = 35.6 and SpecFP95 = 30.4

> >The 450 Mhz UltraSparc II has SpecINT95 = 19.7 and SpecFP95 = 27.
> >..

> >I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
> >again?

> err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

> >Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
> >shipping for some time now.

> http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/roadmap/
> actuall claims that there wont be faster versions of the US-II.
> You'll pretty much have to wait for ultrasparc III .
> Which will supposedly be ... Umm... now-ish.

Great roadmap.  This is the one that states "Under Sun's new roadmap, 1.0
GHz versions of the planned UltraSPARC IV processor will be available in
the year 2000".  Does anyone believe this?

--

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Roland Main » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00



> >I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
> >again?

> err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

> >Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
> >shipping for some time now.

Take a look at http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/products/modules.html
A 480 MHz version seems to be available...

----

Bye,
Roland

--
  __ .  . __


  /O /==\ O\  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
 (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 (0) 641/99-13193 FAX +49 (0) 641/99-41359

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Philip Bro » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00



>> http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/roadmap/

>Great roadmap.  This is the one that states "Under Sun's new roadmap, 1.0
>GHz versions of the planned UltraSPARC IV processor will be available in
>the year 2000".  Does anyone believe this?

Well, given the positioning, it looks like "november, 2000". I can believe
they could tape out by then. After all, they just have to steal a few
Athalon engineers   :-)

Naw, actually, I thought I heard they were pretty close already, to
the basic design.

--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]

The word of the day is mispergitude

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Alan Stang » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00




> > >I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
> > >again?

> > err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

> > >Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
> > >shipping for some time now.

> Take a look at http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/products/modules.html
> A 480 MHz version seems to be available...

And that would be shipping in which Sun workstation?

Either way, going from 450 to 480 isn't going to make a change in the
SPEC numbers, which simply look awful compared to the latest Pentium III's.

I won't even mention the difference in prices for these two processors.

--

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Roland Main » Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:00:00



> > > >I guess I'm wondering when the Sparc processor will become competitive
> > > >again?

> > > err.. when they release the 700mhz version? :-)

> > > >Is there an improved USII coming soon?  The 450Mhz part has been
> > > >shipping for some time now.

> > Take a look at http://www.sun.com/microelectronics/products/modules.html
> > A 480 MHz version seems to be available...

> And that would be shipping in which Sun workstation?

Buy a newer Ultra 10, take the old U-IIi out and put the new 480MHz in... =:-)

Better is to ask Sun for such a modification...

----

Quote:> Either way, going from 450 to 480 isn't going to make a change in the
> SPEC numbers, which simply look awful compared to the latest Pentium III's.

But SPEC marks doesn't make DB performance. Take a look at the memory
bandwidth, cache size or the ability to run SMP with 64 nodes...

----

Bye,
Roland

--
  __ .  . __


  /O /==\ O\  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
 (;O/ \/ \O;) TEL +49 (0) 641/99-13193 FAX +49 (0) 641/99-41359

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by palow.. » Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:00:00





> > Either way, going from 450 to 480 isn't going to make a change in
the
> > SPEC numbers, which simply look awful compared to the latest Pentium
III's.

> But SPEC marks doesn't make DB performance. Take a look at the memory
> bandwidth, cache size or the ability to run SMP with 64 nodes...

You have to admit Alan he is well trained.

---Bob

--
Bob Palowoda   The Solaris x86 Corner   http://fishbutt.fiver.net

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Alan Stang » Thu, 28 Oct 1999 04:00:00





> > > Either way, going from 450 to 480 isn't going to make a change in
> the
> > > SPEC numbers, which simply look awful compared to the latest Pentium
> III's.

> > But SPEC marks doesn't make DB performance. Take a look at the memory
> > bandwidth, cache size or the ability to run SMP with 64 nodes...

While this is all true, it misses the point.

1) We're not discussing DB performance.  While cpu performance is a factor,
the IO subsystem, locking, etc are all more important.

2 and 3) The memory bandwidth on the new PIII is quite good.  The
Coppermine outperforms a Sparc with 4MB of L2 cache on the SpecFP, while
running in 256K of L2 cache.  The SpecFP suite doesn't fit well in only
256KB of L2 cache.   It turns out that the PIII L2 cache is 8 way
associative and runs at the full speed of the cpu core;  this results in
11.2 GB/s at 700 Mhz.  The Dual Rambus has a memory bandwidth of about 3
GB/s.  Higher than the bandwidth on the desktop Sparcs.  I'm not sure what
the latency numbers are though.  (Intel has been having some problems with
Rambus, it appears that these have mostly been resolved).

4) 64 node SMP?  That's nice.  It still doesn't make up for the fact that
Ultra Sparc II performance sucks compared to what every other cpu vendor
has available.   Any news on when the E12K will be replacing the E10K?

Maybe I'm just a big fan of capitalism, and I like to get the bang for my
buck.  Apologizing for the poor CPU performance from Sparc systems is
getting tiring.

Perhaps this is made worse by the fact that my brother works at Intel, and
now I need to listen to his explanations of how his PC kicks the
performance snot out of _any_ workstation sold by Sun Microsystems.

--

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Michael O'Neil » Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:00:00


The AMD K6 doesnt work anyway. I don't know about the Athlon.


> The AMD Athlon 650Mhz which is already available has
> better numbers than the UltraSparc 440Mhz:

> AMD: CINT95: 29.4  CFP95: 22.6(baseline)

> Ultra 10 (440Mhz): CINT95: 18.1 CFP95: 22.7 (19.8 baseline)

> I don't know if the Athlon (or its MB) will work with Solaris.

> I would love to stick with Solaris Intel, but we must make our
> machines last for 4-5 years and the half-hearted support Sun
> gives Solaris x86 does not give you me a warm fuzzy feeling
> for the future, which is why the last machine we bought
> was an Ultra Axi 333Mhz.

> Robert Mullenax

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

--
Corel has something new for you!  Subscribe to our e-newsletter and
learn what's new and happening at Corel!  Subscribe at
http://www.corel.com/newsletter

  michaelon.vcf
< 1K Download
 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Philip Bro » Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:00:00



>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>--------------0A8D9F2AA7D8BEAC8D8EDEE4
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>The AMD K6 doesnt work anyway. I don't know about the Athlon.

it doesn't work on YOUR system. I've seen people posting it works for them.

PS: Ditch the vcard.

--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]

The word of the day is mispergitude

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Boris Benk » Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:00:00


A> Maybe I'm just a big fan of capitalism, and I like to get the bang
for my

Quote:> buck.  Apologizing for the poor CPU performance from Sparc systems is
> getting tiring.

I guess I'm a big fan of capitalism, too... But...
Please show me your average CPU utilization in your last 24 hours.
How well are you using the CPU in your machine?
It is used fully upto 99.9% in last 24 hours, right?

=b

--
============================================================================



Sluba za informatiko                 | Phone: (work) +386 69 31 676
                                      |        (ISDN) +386 69 14 632
===========================================================================

 
 
 

UltraSparc performance and the Pentium III

Post by Alan Stang » Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:00:00



> A> Maybe I'm just a big fan of capitalism, and I like to get the bang
> for my
> > buck.  Apologizing for the poor CPU performance from Sparc systems is
> > getting tiring.

> I guess I'm a big fan of capitalism, too... But...
> Please show me your average CPU utilization in your last 24 hours.
> How well are you using the CPU in your machine?
> It is used fully upto 99.9% in last 24 hours, right?

Here's the results on a 28 cpu system....

from sar:

00:00:01    %usr    %sys    %wio   %idle
00:20:00      93       6       1       0
00:40:00      93       6       1       0
01:00:04      93       6       1       0
01:20:00      93       6       1       0
01:40:00      93       6       1       0
02:00:00      93       6       1       0
02:20:00      93       6       1       0
02:40:01      93       6       1       0
03:00:00      93       6       1       0
03:20:00      93       6       1       0
03:40:00      93       6       1       0
04:00:00      93       6       1       0
04:20:01      93       6       1       0
04:40:00      93       6       1       0
05:00:01      93       6       1       0
05:20:00      93       6       1       0
05:40:00      92       7       1       0
06:00:01      91       8       1       0
06:20:00      91       8       1       0
06:40:01      91       8       1       0
07:00:01      91       7       1       0
07:20:00      91       8       1       0
07:40:00      90      10       0       0
08:00:01      91       9       0       0
08:20:00      92       7       0       0
08:40:00      92       7       1       0
09:00:01      91       8       1       0
09:20:01      91       8       1       0
09:40:01      90       8       1       0
10:00:01      90       9       1       0
10:20:00      90       8       1       0
10:40:00      91       8       1       0
11:00:00      90       9       1       0
11:20:00      89      10       1       0
11:40:00      89       9       1       0
12:00:00      90       9       1       0
12:20:00      89      10       1       0
12:40:00      92       7       1       0
13:00:00      93       6       1       0
13:20:01      91       8       1       0
13:40:00      91       8       1       0
14:00:00      92       8       1       0
14:20:00      92       8       0       0
14:40:01      93       7       1       0
15:00:00      92       7       1       0
15:20:00      92       8       1       0
15:40:01      92       7       1       0

Average       92       7       1       0

$ mpstat | wc -l
      29

Anymore questions?

--

 
 
 

1. UltraSPARC-IIi vs. UltraSPARC-I

UltraSPARC-IIi  Vs. UltraSPARC-I
I'd like to know the difference between these 2 processors.

Will a 167 MHz Ultra 1 workstation blow a 270MHz UltraSPARC IIi Ultra 5 out
of the water? Do I actually get $4000 more power out of the Ultra 1? Am I
comparing apples 2 pairs?

Any suggestions or links are appreciated.

-Jeremy Loss

2. Apache problems with dynamic IP

3. Performance evaluation: UltraSPARC vs. P-III

4. Install PAM

5. Sun 440 Mhz Netra T1 = which Pentium III in Performance???

6. Linux Applications

7. Dual Pentium II vs Pentium III

8. Shell Scripts read and parse lines from a file

9. old hardware/bios story: linux 6.1, slackware 9.0, CDROM, pentium III, pentium I

10. Intel's Itanium 2 vs Sun's UltraSPARC III

11. Mixing UltraSparc III proc speed in E280R

12. UltraSparc-III at DAC

13. UltraSparc III