[rescue] R8k I2's
Joshua D Boyd
jdboyd at cs.millersville.edu
Wed Jan 8 00:05:07 CST 2003
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 09:48:13PM -0800, Francisco Javier Mesa-Martinez wrote:
> The R10K is pretty much a better balanced single chip R8K, and it is a
> great design in my opinion. And for most purposes is almost 2x as fast as
No argument hear.
> > Anyway, when the R8k was happy, it kept up with the later released R10ks
> > fairly well.
> Hum... as a person that used heavily both machines I find this hard to
> believe. There are some hardcore r8K supported that like that whole myth
> of the R8K running certain code faster than an R10K, and it was usually
> examples of code that would fit in the 4MB cache for the R8K, wereas the
> R10K only had 2MB of cache, so certain memory spills are to blame.
Hmm. I had been under the impression that it was supposed to be 75% of
the speed of the R10k. Could be wrong. Byte has gone all hostile for
people wanting to find old articles to fact check and cite.
> > Now, in my opinion, an R8k is in no way shape or form a waste of space.
> > It might not make for the best interactive desktop workstation, but for
> > running floating point heavy custom software, my understanding is that
> > it is still very usefull. Especially when in the form of a Challenge,
> > like the one that George has.
> Well noone is claiming that the R8K is a waste of space, but if anyone
> wants to spend $$$ on a machine for actual use, their bucks will be better
> spent on an R10K machine. For the coolness factor, then yeah go for the
> R8K but make sure that you understand that it will not be a responsive
> workstation (when compared to more balanced machines).
Again, no argument.
Joshua D. Boyd
More information about the rescue