Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IBM Opens Up POWER Architecture For Licensing

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Multiple currencies exist in the world. We don't all use USD.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
      well in economy there are a lot of calculations that require an FPU, is a bit more complex than count money using cents.
      I'm not saying there's no need for an FPU (F as in floating)! I'm saying that you don't need a special fixed point unit.

      /edit:
      With "cents" I meant the smallest unit in your currency. I don't have USD in my wallet
      Last edited by droste; 08-11-2013, 12:10 PM.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by droste View Post
        I'm not saying there's no need for an FPU (F as in floating)! I'm saying that you don't need a special fixed point unit.

        /edit:
        With "cents" I meant the smallest unit in your currency. I don't have USD in my wallet
        well you have interest rates , money value proyections, devaluation, inflation, investment rates, taxes, deductibles, loans, etc. but at the end is a problem of quantity, this marginal errors won't be a problem for 100.000 transaction but for millions of transactions/per hour it grows to a big number, big enough to fear litigation that will cost you much more than just get an IBM power system to keep them under control

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by dibal View Post
          As long as you didn't have infinite Bits to store your (intermediate) Results, rounding hits. Are there Papers about this special FP Format available ?
          I think he means rounding errors when converting decimals into binary floating point numbers. More DFP info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_floating_point

          Comment


          • #45
            Nowadays, looks like everyone open ups their IP for licensing .
            Start with nVidia, then IBM. Who next?

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Obscene_CNN View Post
              well here are some SAP Standard Application Benchmarks. (Note that 8 core Power 7+ chips could be used to level the playing field )

              http://www.sap.com/solutions/benchmark/sd2tier.epx

              (POWER7+, 3.41 Ghz) IBM Flex System p270 Compute Node, 4 Processors / 24 Cores

              Dialog Steps Per Hour : 4103000
              SAPS : 68380
              Fully Processed Line Items Per Hour : 1367670


              (Intel Xeon Processor E5-4650, 2.7 Ghz) Dell PowerEdge R820, 4 Processors / 32 Cores

              Dialog Steps Per Hour : 4241000
              SAPS : 70680
              Fully Processed Line Items Per Hour : 1413670
              Let's be fair and compare against the 8 core Power7


              IBM p750 POWER7 3.55Ghz 4s/32c/128T - 93,080 SAPS

              http://download.sap.com/download.epd?co ... 3BD00B024B

              IBM Flex p260 POWER7+ 4.1Ghz 2s/16c/64T - 54,700 SAPS

              http://download.sap.com/download.epd?co ... 2D331FE3FF

              Bear in mind that the top bin 8 core Power7+ is 4.22Ghz which hasn't been tested yet on this benchmark.

              Per core Power7+ is around 50-60% faster than Intel.

              IBM will be licensing the Power8, not Power7. A couple of articles just popped up:

              http://www.computerworld.com.au/arti.../?fp=4&fpid=18

              http://www.pcworld.com/article/20475...wer8-chip.html

              If what IBM is quoting is true that Power8 is 3x faster than Power7, this makes Power8 up to 4.5x faster than the fastest Intel chip.

              "You can imagine if you have 3x the performance of a Power7, you can do some very interesting things, Steucheli said.

              Comment


              • #47
                According tho this article the power 8 is 1.6 times faster than the power 7+ on single thread apps.

                http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08...8_server_chip/

                It also notes that the cache bandwidth has doubled and it has provisions for a L4 cache.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Timrjothy
                  My bet's on consoles made this happen. (I.e was the last straw.)
                  Could be so.
                  But perhaps that wouldn't have happened if they did what they now did five years ago.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X