[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: gEDA-user: wont be watching list :(
- To: <geda-user@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: gEDA-user: wont be watching list :(
- From: "Robert Thorpe" <Robert.Thorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:55:31 -0000
- Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
- Delivered-to: geda-user-outgoing@seul.org
- Delivered-to: geda-user@seul.org
- Delivery-date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:01:17 -0500
- Reply-to: geda-user@xxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-geda-user@xxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcYbhErIyKe4iQa5Sw23eceAI5nuMQACmqpA
- Thread-topic: gEDA-user: wont be watching list :(
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-geda-user@xxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-geda-user@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave McGuire
> Sent: 17 January 2006 16:35
> To: geda-user@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: wont be watching list :(
>
> On Jan 17, 2006, at 4:02 AM, Robert Thorpe wrote:
> >> it'll eat PCs for lunch in most applications, and you won't have
> >> hardware problems.
> >
> > That I very much doubt. UltraSPARCs have been slower than
> even middle
> > of the road PCs for years now.
>
> Doubt it all you want, I'm running dozens of them in
> production, my friend. There's more to computer performance
> than processor clock speed.
It probably depends on what you're doing. At the place I work all the
unix machines have been replaced because PCs were found to be faster.
I've never found an application where a workstation can beat a decent
Xeon, and they certainly rarely do in benchmarks, but I can believe they
exist.
Of-course for multi-processing they're much better, and built to a high
standard.