Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SPARC, IA64 Ports Of Ubuntu Face Decommissioning

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by brent View Post
    No, Itanium is dead, really. Or to be more accurate, it's a dead horse.
    That graphic is hilarious.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by brent View Post
      No, Itanium is dead, really. Or to be more accurate, it's a dead horse.
      Not so funny, because you completely missed the point. The biggest advantage of Itanium VLIW architecture is not performance, but reliability. While typical uptime of x86 machine can be 99,999% of year, IA-64 machines have 99,99999%, which means minutes vs. seconds of downtime. This makes Itanium perfect choice for solutions, where reliability demand is no 1 like HP-UX servers.

      Yes, it is not for your home computer. But who cares....

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by next9 View Post
        Not so funny, because you completely missed the point. The biggest advantage of Itanium VLIW architecture is not performance, but reliability. While typical uptime of x86 machine can be 99,999% of year, IA-64 machines have 99,99999%, which means minutes vs. seconds of downtime. This makes Itanium perfect choice for solutions, where reliability demand is no 1 like HP-UX servers.

        Yes, it is not for your home computer. But who cares....
        Is that really because of the CPU family chosen? Would it be possible to get such reliability guarantees with a Xeon?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by waucka View Post
          Is that really because of the CPU family chosen? Would it be possible to get such reliability guarantees with a Xeon?
          No. IA-64 has some interesting features x86 lacks. For example core-level lockstep is some kind of "raid" for processor core. It allows computational redundancy on hardware level, thus different cores can do the same task and verify the result or solve the computational failure... and not only among the cores of the same CPU, but also among the different sockets.

          It is true Itanium can not beat Xeons and Opterons in price/performance comparison. But the task of these CPU is different - to be rockstable for applications, where it is necessary and crucial.

          Comment


          • #20
            Intel's Core i7 and AMD's newer Phenom/Opteron offerings implement some of the features allowing better reliability known from Itanium. They include much more advanced Machine Check Exception usage, for example.
            I don't think you need Itanium for high availability anymore. x86 has made big steps in this area.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by next9 View Post
              No. IA-64 has some interesting features x86 lacks.
              These aren't features specific to the architecture, but specific to the implementation known as Itanium.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by next9 View Post
                No. IA-64 has some interesting features x86 lacks. For example core-level lockstep is some kind of "raid" for processor core. It allows computational redundancy on hardware level, thus different cores can do the same task and verify the result or solve the computational failure... and not only among the cores of the same CPU, but also among the different sockets.

                It is true Itanium can not beat Xeons and Opterons in price/performance comparison. But the task of these CPU is different - to be rockstable for applications, where it is necessary and crucial.
                Actually ARM can do this as well.. and its also common for embeddded x86

                SPARC has similar functionality in the LEON hardened implementation that can even error correct flipped register bits for operation in high radiation environments.

                I wish there were a 200$ LEON board out there with a decent speed chip it seems most of them are around 200Mhz when they claim as much as 1.5Ghz is possible with the current design. A 1.5Ghz leon would save the 32bit SPARC Linux port... and 64bit is an offshoot/refinement of that.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by movieman View Post
                  I'm not so sure: Ubuntu isn't really a player in the 'serious' server market which might have SPARC or IA64 CPUs instead of x86... I have it on my MYthTV/NFS server box at home but it changes too much too fast for me to risk it on a server that does real work.
                  That's what I was talking about. Not only ubuntu is an unstable distro, but also is a desktop distro who doesn't care about constant uptime.
                  Canonical needs to change his way of making the distro if he wants a server ready OS. Not only making ubuntu more stable, but also removing some useless heavy toy which is only usable by end-users.

                  Not so funny, because you completely missed the point. The biggest advantage of Itanium VLIW architecture is not performance, but reliability. While typical uptime of x86 machine can be 99,999% of year, IA-64 machines have 99,99999%, which means minutes vs. seconds of downtime. This makes Itanium perfect choice for solutions, where reliability demand is no 1 like HP-UX servers.

                  Yes, it is not for your home computer. But who cares.... :P
                  That's true. But x86 current computers have changed since 1980.
                  For today, is totally plausible to make a x86 server, and that's extremely cheap in comparison to an IA-64 or SPARC server. Yeah, you may have less reliability, but since a small company doesn't have the responsability google has, who cares?
                  And one more thing. What do you think about clustering and loading balance? Two pcs are faster than one, and the probability for two pcs being down at the same time are 99,999% of the 99,999% :P
                  IMHO thats why google chooses an horde of home x86 computers instead of those expensive IA-64 servers.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Well, the probability for two pcs being down at the same time are 99,999% of the 99,999% is damn crappy lol
                    I meant 100 - 99,999

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X