[SunRescue] SS5 model help

[Joshua D. Boyd]

Ack.  If the 170s are nearly as good as the low end ultra, then that low
end ultra must really suck.  I spend a lot of time on 170s and I find them
to be unbelieveable.  I mean, even pine crawls.  Back when my 486 was
still loaded with ram (it used to have 56 megs, now only 28) I found it to
be more usefull that the 170s I work on.  I suppose that some
programs probably ran technically slower, but the system was more
responsive.  Pine certainly was.  Anything graphical also was (the Sparc
having a CG6 board).

And wasn't there recently a discussion saying that for server applications
the 85s were better?

--
Joshua Boyd

On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Bill Bradford wrote:

> There were 70, 85, 110, and 170mhz SS5s made; the 170 is the most
> preferrable, and is close to an ultra 1/140 in performance...  it would
> be a HUGE upgrade from your 70mhz box.