PDA

View Full Version : Boxx Opterons arrive



Ade
06-02-2003, 09:40 PM
opteron mp (http://www.boxxtech.com/asp/cf_ms2.asp?modelseriesID=27#170)

how good are, they? benches please...

wizlon
06-03-2003, 02:08 AM
Hi Ade, those Boxx machines are fantastic, I'am just waiting to see what Apple does with the 970 before I buy one.

Ade
06-03-2003, 03:17 AM
same

Beamtracer
06-03-2003, 05:16 AM
Do these boxes come with the Windows operating system? The problem with AMD is that they are slaves to Microsoft.

Last I heard, Microsoft was doing a go-slow in developing a 64-bit version of Windows that would run on these AMD processors. I assume that you'd have to use Linux if you want to use AMD's Opteron processor, until Microsoft decides to come to the party.

Mac users have other things very soon to get excited about.

Ade
06-03-2003, 10:29 PM
I have read reports sayin the 970 chip is 30% cheaper to make than g4.. What ****s me is we know apple wont pass any savings on to their loyal legionaires.

Red_Oddity
06-04-2003, 03:25 AM
Actually Beam, the Opterons run on a 32bit system aswell, that's what makes these processors so special.

They are a tenth the price of Intel's Itanium processors and are fully scalable, the moment windows goes 64bit you can just leave your pc config as it is and install that 64bit OS.

Offcourse, the real advantage off these processors is when Windows goes 64bit, but it is a nice development on the PC platform, especially as AMD ceases development on the 32bit platform and just goes 64bit.

Just too bad there isn't any real solid info on any 64 bit processor and their advantages over one and another (Itanium, Opteron and PPC970)

Ade
06-04-2003, 03:32 AM
next apple release -- DP 1.65, DP 1.8 g4's...

eblu
06-04-2003, 10:53 AM
i work with a guy who has a compaq dual xeon 2 ghz.

I have a g4 500 (single processor).

for whatever reason, I feel that I have the better machine. Does that make me biased? you betcha. does that make me wrong? no.

both machines have strong points and weak points, but I feel that my machine offers me more ways to be productive than any PC based system could. Granted, I NEED a better graphics card, and I could use more hard drive space, but jaws dropped when i grabbed the sony firewire DVD-+r drive, hooked it up, and it worked without any software. People freak out when i open up my connect to panel, because i have the only machine that can hit every machine on the network... we run PCs, SGIs, and macs, mine is the only osX mac at the moment.

yeah a faster processor would be sweet, a quadro card would rock, and whatever else is bleeding edge too, but frankly, my mac, despite being the oldest machine in our graphics dept, rocks the house... until i go home to my 933 with a 17" apple flatscreen, and a raid setup.

what pray tell is this opteron supposed to do again? Its just a processor. I'm so over it.

Beamtracer
06-04-2003, 03:56 PM
The significant thing about the new 64-bit processors from Intel and AMD is that it represents a split in the Windows architecture. A fork in the road, you could say.

Intel's Itanium (itanic) and AMD's Opteron are very different processors, and will require different versions of Windows specific to those processors.

The Itanium processor has been a complete flop. It's very expensive, only runs 64-bit software natively, and isn't all that fast. AMD's 64-bit processors will also be able to run 32-bit software natively, as will the IBM970 soon to be released in Apple machines.

So, there'll be a minimum of 3 versions of Windows.... IA32 (for current PCs), IA64 (for the Itanic) and AMD64. Then there's professional and home versions of Windows. Microsoft has enough trouble creating a secure and stable operating system as it is, how will they cope with 3 or more OSs?

Meanwhile Apple has one OS, which has the features that Windows users would only get in the "professional" version of Windows.

jcool
06-04-2003, 04:10 PM
Geez.. the guy asks for benchmarks and instead there's another mac vs. pc debate. Here's the benchmarks:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/opteron-23.html#3drendering

It looks like the Xeons are still the champs, but they do have a very large clockspeed advantage, and I believe this is the Win32 version of XP that was tested. The Opterons pounded the Xeons on the Server tests, but that's no help to us.

As for multiple versions of windows, well, they already have at least 6 or more counting the different server versions, so what's a few more? Apple can't seem to maintain 1 without either breaking my USB hub or giving me the beachball of death in modeler. :p

Beamtracer
06-04-2003, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by jcool
Geez.. the guy asks for benchmarks and instead there's another mac vs. pc debate.

If you don't bring Macs into the discussion then why discuss it on the Mac forum? If you only want to discuss Windows PCs there are other places to do that.

Red_Oddity
06-05-2003, 03:25 AM
I think this discussing is more more based (or should be) what it would mean for LW...
How does it shift the performance mark when using LW (either on Panther or some 64bit Windows (is Longhorn 64 bit?))

Still, I don't think the Itaniums where ever meant for the consumer market, rather for servers and whatnot...

btw. is Linux 64bit?, Would be nice to see a Linux LW version by then should it be the case...

Red_Oddity
06-05-2003, 03:31 AM
Ah...never mind, just read the article...seems Linux has been 64 bit ever since Kernel 2.0...But it seems it still needs some work...

Windows seems to be the problem when it comes to 64bit (duh...)

Still, it's a nice start, the prices of Xeon 3.06 GHz are the same as a Opteron 244, about $850 US.
Especially if you consider that the Opterons are not running at full capacity...

Ade
06-05-2003, 08:09 AM
Apple releases a 64 bit x86 OS and beats MS to the punch?

Beamtracer
06-05-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Ade
Apple releases a 64 bit x86 OS and beats MS to the punch?

Now that would be interesting if Apple released a 64-bit OS X for AMD's platform, though I don't think Apple would do it. Microsoft tolerates Apple, as M$ can say they are not a total monopoly and keep the anti-trust regulators at bay.

If Apple tried to edge in on Microsoft's turf, I think M$ would take a more aggressive attitude against Apple.

My prediction for Apple's platform roll out is: they'll announce the 64-bit platform this month (June), with IBM-970 based machines on the market within weeks of that announcement. New 64-bit Panther OS to be released in September.

Because the machines will be out before the OS, this puts Apple in the same position as AMD64 based Windows machines. All dressed up with nowhere to go... 64-bit machines running a 32-bit OS.

September is not that far away. I'd be surprised if Microsoft could release their OS for Opteron before that time. I think Apple will get there first.

Ade
06-05-2003, 09:42 PM
US government loves MS cause they have a strangle hold and make em money.
Imagine Apple open sourced their OS but it could only run on apple hardware. Then u would have a linux like mac that every country has their own flavour and MS can suck my...

markus
06-07-2003, 01:45 AM
Originally posted by Red_Oddity
btw. is Linux 64bit?, Would be nice to see a Linux LW version by then should it be the case...

There has been a Operon 64bit version of the Linux Kernel since almost day 1 that this processor existed.
I have heard of a demo of Unreal Tournament 2003 running in a 64bit version on a 64bit Linux Kernel, and that was several months ago. So I would assume that any linux kernel you can get today has fairly advanced and stable code for the Opteron in 64bit mode.

And to clarify some things people always forget: The increase in speed when running the processor in 32bit comes almost exclusively from the fact that the CPU has more registers, and thus needs to do less (comparably slow) fetches of data from the main memory.
Saying that 64bit processors make 32bit code run faster is a myth.
Only with an operating system and an application, both specifically compiled for 64bit, you get to use the real power of this CPU.

Beamtracer
06-08-2003, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by markus

Saying that 64bit processors make 32bit code run faster is a myth.

That's true, Markus, but myths are great marketing tools.

People on other threads are already expressing disappointment that new Apple IBM-970 based machines are rumored to be 1.8GHz clockspeed when a Pentium is 3.2GHz.

It's total lunacy. You just can't compare clockspeeds with 2 different processor architectures, especially when one is an entirely new processor that hasn't been released yet. But people think it means something.

Any software company that is first off the block with 64-bit ready software will have a similar marketing advantage.

Despite all that, 64-bit processing will be a necessity due to the growing RAM needs of personal computers. We won't want to have software that doesn't read all the RAM we have in our machines.

Ade
06-08-2003, 11:43 AM
What I want to see is the day when Steve Jobs switches PIXAR to apple technology and advertises it to everyone, and encourages lucas to do the same!

toby
06-08-2003, 03:10 PM
i think he already tried that with the x-serve, then switched back to something else, linux or pc, i don't remember

LSlugger
06-08-2003, 04:38 PM
More Opteron benchmarks at AnandTech (http://anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1818&p=11).

Mandrake and SuSE have AMD64 versions of their enterprise distribution. Red Hat is still testing the waters with a technology preview based on RH 9.

Windows 2003 will be available in a lower-cost web edition (targeting Linux and Xserve), but I think that will be IA-32, only.

One factor in Pixar choosing Linux over OS X for render nodes may be the blade form factor. RackSaver's BladeRack accomodates up to 176 processors in a 7' rack. Their more traditional rack maxes out at 64 processors (although Apple advertises 84 processors per rack).