Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> 
>> Zhang Weiwu wrote:
>>
>>> Hello. After I get an old U5 box, I decide to replace my desktop 
>>> computer with another UltraSparc. My desktop computer is Pentium 1G / 
>>> 256MB memory / ATA100 IDE box.
>>>
>>> What UltraSparc (with how many of what CPU) has similiar average 
>>> desktop performance as my Pentium box? I usually only browsing 
>>> around, use openoffice and gimp a little, vim as editor and doesn't 
>>> use huge IDE like eclipse. What's your suggestion?
>>
>> This is just a guess, but an Ultra 2 with dual 300s or 400s is 
>> probably going to be pretty close in performance.
>>
> A small test showed very disapointing result. (This is not a desktop 
> performace test, only I play with it)
> 
> I tried to compare my Ultra 5 ( 333MHz single CPU / ATA66 IDE / 256 MB ) 
> with Celeron 600 MHz box ( ATA 66, 256MB memory). My test is to 
> calculate the complecity of Linux kernel code.
> (command line: # sloccount /usr/src/linux-sparc-2.4.27/ )
> 
> On U5 it takes325 seconds, on Celeron it takes 257 seconds. They both 
> take almost same amount of kernel time, but U5 takes 210 seconds user 
> time, while Celeron only takes 76 seconds.
> 
> To perform this task, Celeron used 79% of total time compare to U5. So I 
> think perhaps U5 does not perform better than Celeron 500MHz. This way, 
> I can hardly expect dual 300MHz would overperform Pentium 1G, especially 
> dual CPU (IMHO) does not help much with desktop thanks to that only a 
> few desktop applications use more than one process...
> 
> Perhaps I am wrong in this small test?

Yes, a U2 is *not* a U5. The U5 and U10 were probably the crappiest Ultra 
machines that Sun put out. Also, the test was a little one-sided since the 
Celeron had almost twice the speed and an IDE chipset with working DMA :) A 
2x300 U2 would "mop the floor" with the Celeron in that test.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney
Gentoo Linux Developer
Installer Project

--
gentoo-sparc@g.o mailing list