|
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 mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.