[rescue] SMP on intel wasteful?

[ssandau at bath.tmac.com]

My analogy (and I'm sticking to it) is that x86 hardware is like a 2-stroke 
engine and real servers are like diesels. Each has its place, but you certainly 
would NEVER attempt to power a bulldozer with a 2-stroke. It may be fast, but 
loads KILL it.

In addition, I have never had an IRQ or plug&puke problem with a SPARC. I've 
also never been able to boot an x86 box with a serial terminal. Netbooting is 
MUCH easier with a SPARC or a HP9000 (only ones I own...) and so on.

Each does have its place, but x86 was NEVER meant to be a server, and it shows. 
Man, they don't even have 16 REAL IRQs. The last bunch are just patched onto 
the first bunch!

> > > I've always found those nebulous arguments against PeeCee hardware
> > > interesting.  Usually unfounded in recent fact, but interesting
> > > nonetheless.  When put to the test though I've found that dollar for
> > > dollar a PeeCee running UNIX will spank a RISC box running UNIX.
> >
> >   *bzzzt*  Troll alert.
> >   *bzzzt*  Don't-know-what-CPAI-is alert.
> >   *bzzzt*  Possible remote Intel Marketing Clone alert.
> 
> Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la la la" won't make x86 go
> away.  Believe me, I've tried.  Sorry if the following is grammatically
> poor, I'm just rambling.
> 
> Bottom line, x86 is fast.  It is as ugly as sin and has some nasty
> compromises in it, but it is fast.  The reason for this is dead simple,
> it's a commodity architecture that discourages stratification within it.
> Let me relate a little story that I feel has some relevance to this
> discussion.
> 
<sorry, snipped>


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/