On 13 Jul 2003 at 4:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Say you have a ginormous rig standing in a clean room, that is > > business critical, runs a handful or even several dozens of > > (clustered) 604e processors. Say you want to develop and test new > > This is not such a box. It's a desktop/deskside unit, a workstation. The > 604e-based server is somewhat cheaper at $3599 and for that you get one > CPU and, as far as I can tell, no ability to add a second.
In that case, you simply missed the point. This is a workstation, and a mainframe multiprocessor configuration with up to eight such processors is not a myth: a quick search reveals a 1998 model with 8 processors, the 7013-J50 <http://www1.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi- bin/master?xh=vxwdytweMAF2$X2USenGnN9332&request=salesmanual&parms=H%5 F7013%2DJ50&xhi=salesmanual%5E&xfr=N>, an eight-way (dual-processing) machine. I've already tried to explain how a workstation can accompany a server for the purposes of development and testing, and further below I'll try to explain in more detail. > > software for that system. In that case, you need a system that runs > > the same software on the same hardware. The rig cost your company > > several 100,000 dollars to deploy, and at some point you need an > > extra or replacement workstation to develop and test your software > > on. O, and besides that, you as the developer are payed a yearly sum > > that could buy your company several dozen high-end Athlon > > workstations. Does a 8,000 dollar strike you as odd under those > > conditions? Remember that this workstation isn't just cheap hardware; > > it's cheap hardware for which IBM will supply you with expensive > > spare parts for years and years to come. > > RS/6000 43P Model 150 is not that kind of box, it's a workstation, has > good graphics. The RS/6000 43P Model 150 is also available as an entry level server <http://www- 132.ibm.com/content/home/store_IBMPublicUSA/en_US/eServer/pSe ries/entry/43P150.html>, by the way. As a workstation, it has optional high performance graphics. To quote from the blurb at <http://www- 1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/workstations/43p_150_desc.h tml>: The entry POWER GXT130P 2D graphics accelerator meets the graphics requirements of many technical and commercial applications. This accelerator is also a cost-effective choice for environments that require a graphical console. In other words: You *can* get high performance 3D graphics acceleration, but that's just an option (and not even an actual performance consideration today). > People who want lots of CPU power tend to go for IA32 and run Linux. > That's how Shrek was rendered. The Dreamworks folk also usded SGI > workstations running IRIX, but now they're using Linux for everything. I was referring to workstations that accompany mainframes, not rendering farms. Your 3D performance argument doesn't hold. Besides, this box runs AIX by default (with OpenGL support, it must be said). If you develop applications to run on mainframes, having a workstation handy to not only develop, but also test your compilations on is a great advantage: you can spare your mainframe from compile/debug jobs, and avoid risks to its availability. The performance of a mainframe is merely its secundary objective; it's the availability of data and services that counts. A workstation with a relatively ancient CPU such as the 604e can now only be sold (for that much money) because it is essential to the process of deploying applications to mainframes using the same 604e processors, which have been in use now for many years (since 1995?), and as mainframes go, may be in use for another ten to twenty years. Not for their performance, but for their availability and irreplaceability. Jeroen
