Re: iSeries Nav?

Lukas Beeler skrev:

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 15:55, Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen <ravn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I was at a Java performance talk where it was mentioned that the x86
processors are SO fast these days that hundreds of instructions can be
done in the time it takes to get a single value from memory. Every
time. Having more cores does not help this.

Power 6 is still stuck with dual channel DDR2-Memory at 667 Mhz, while
Intel is currently using Triple-Channel DDR3 Memory at 1333 Mhz. Intel
also uses much faster On-Die L3 Cache (currently at 8MB in the
entry-level CPUs). Intel also uses a much more efficient 45nm process
to create their hardware, and the next generation to be launched in Q1
2010 will be in 32nm process.

IBM is planning to release Power 7 in 45nm process somewhen in 2010 -
at a time when Intel will already by bringing out 32nm CPUs.

IBM seriously missed the bus, and is lagging behind more every year.

Our core business legacy product is essentially disk-bound. The exact speed of memory and cpu does not matter much if they can keep up with the disks (which they usually can).

It is different for Java where a large chunk of memory is needed, AND it is needed in RAM (whatever that is called in ibmeese) due to garbage collection basically being global. That is the primary reason for me that Java programs require a lot of nursing to run well on the i, as this is not how OS/400 behaves normally.

To quote Seymoure Cray: "If you were plowing a field, which would you rather use? Two strong oxen or 1024 chickens?"

Unfortunately Java is rather unoxenfriendly.

There's a reason why Apple switched from Power to Intel - Intel is
better.

I believe the transition is not as much a technical issue but a monetary issue. Apple could get more value for their money with mobile x86 cpu's instead of being a grumpy customer in the IBM shop, where mobile cpu's are very low priority.
To use a car analogy[1], IBM builds engines for american trucks, and Apple have european sportscars.





[1] Thorbjørns rule: If you can use a car analogy, you _must_ :)