×

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.




Andy,

The 810 we quoted was the 1020 CPW. We looked at the 800 model, but elected
to remain with the 810 with the extra CPW capacity.

Thanks,
Loyd


--  
Loyd Goodbar
Programmer/analyst
BorgWarner Incorporated
ETS/Water Valley
662-473-5713
lgoodbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Nolen-Parkhouse [mailto:aparkhouse@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 7:24 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: IBM iseries comparison site??


> All these arguments we're persuing to back the claim that an LPAR'd 
> 810 is the best decision. We picked the smallest 810, which is I think 
> about 3x faster
> than our current 720, because of its 1050 (?) interactive CPWs in the
> Enterprise edition, LPARing capability, and Linux-hosted capability.

You may have an old quote for an 810.  At the initial announcement of the
810 there were three processors, the #2466, the #2467, and the #2469, with
CPW ratings of 1020, 1470, and 2700 respectively.  A subsequent announcement
added the #2465 with a 750 CPW, this might meet your needs at a lower price.

> Thanks,
> Loyd


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.