dav@genisco.gtc.com (David L. Markowitz) (12/30/90)
fitz@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Kerien Fitzpatrick) writes: >As a general note, the performance of the SPARC 1E was disappointing at >best. Comparing the same code between a diskless 1+ with 12Mb memory and >the diskfull (yes, I was using a second ethernet board) SPARC 1E with 8Mb >- the code rmore than three times as fast on the 1+. This is hardly a fair comparison! The 1+ is 15.8 MIPS vs. the 1E's 12.5 MIPS, and 4.0.3 is known to be a dog with only 8 MB, especially if you run a window system. Also the ECC RAM is slower, but is ECC (important in many applications). Try comparing a 1E with a combo board with 8 MB additional in SIMMs on it to yield 12 MB total vs. a SPARCstation 1 also running 4.0.3. >A nice alternative >if you need VME is to use one of the SBus <-> VMEbus adaptors. When we >swapped out the SPARC 1E with a 1+ motherboard and Solflower's SBus <-> >VMEbus adaptor (and kept the local disk) we picked up performance from the >diskless 1+ (as would be expected). Given University discount, the 1+ >motherboard + Solflower costs less than the SPARC 1E + 4Mb ECC memory >board. This is true. Only use a 1E where you need a 1E, such as in ruggedized MIL VME boxes (like we build). Only use ECC RAM when you need it. An alternative is (now) available. >The SPARC 1E is a good idea, the implementation leaves a lot to be >desired. We are going with the motherboards + Solflower because of easy >(and cheap) memory upgrade, three SBus slots, price, performance, and >retaining standard SunOS (I've heard 4.1e will be ready first quarter 91). >Beyond that you still have the nice audio I/O port (great on a mobile >robot....you can record audio for playback....have the errorhandler trap - >AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!! another bug!). The combo board also provides two Sbus slots. The rest of your comments are very accurate. Update them now, and compare the 1E vs. a SS2! David L. Markowitz Genisco Technology Corporation dav@gtc.com