<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>IBM releases new supercomputer</title>
		<description>Discuss IBM releases new supercomputer</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 02:23:51 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/19589/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1515</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Of course you can run lots of virtual machines on a Mainframe. IBM claims to consolidate 1500 x86 servers on a Mainframe. But in the notes, it turns out that IBM assumes all servers to idle and the Mainframe to do 100% work. If any modern x86 server is faster than a Mainframe, what will happen if the virtualized machines do some work? The Mainframe will crumble and choke. So, if all the VMs do some work at the same time, it will not work.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:41:05 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1515</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1514</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Naterm, I am not overestimating anything. I only link to two Mainframe technical experts: one that has programmed an Mainframe emulator, and another expert that ported Linux to Mainframe. They both give roughly the same estimation about Mainframe CPU power. Just read the links and see what they say. I doubt you can write an emulator or port an OS?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:40:22 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1514</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1506</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, RAS features are the most important advantage of a mainframe. You also seem to be really over estimating the performance of x86. What was the z10 running? How many cores activated? How many IFLs? How many zIIPs? How many zAAPs? I really doubt you can run a hundred thousand virtual machines on an 8-way Nehalem EX box. You can on a zEnterprise. The most important thing about a mainframe isn't outright performance, it's performance with workloads that only run on mainframes with RAS features that aren't on any other platform. It doesn't matter how fast that Nehalem-EX is if you can't run your applications on it. It's usually cheaper to buy a new mainframe than buy expensive x86 servers and do a code port.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:44:43 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1506</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1502</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Naterm, I do not compare RAS on Intel and on the Mainframe. I just talk about CPU power. And I showed with two independent links, that a 8-way PC with Nehalem-EX is faster than the previous z10. blandead, Yes I know the AMD Opteron also crushes the IBM Mainframe z10. The reason I talked about Nehalem-EX is because the founder of Hercules compares it to a Mainframe (in one of my links above)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:51:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1502</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1480</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Forgot to add if Nehalem-EX's RAS features pale in comparison to a mainframe, then the Opteron 6100s don't even need apply. They really don't have much in the way of RAS.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 10:32:26 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1480</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1479</link>
			<description><![CDATA[First off, the Nehalem-EX doesn't have RAS features like a mainframe. Can you 'RAID' the memory on a Nehalem-EX? Nope, sure can't. Not to mention that the z10/z11 mainframe engines are basically POWER6 CPUs, which while not as quick as the POWER7 are still far from the snails you pretend them to be. You're probably thinking of the performance of the old bipolar logic 31-bit address/32-bit data mainframes. Not to mention with the zEnterprise you'll be able to add in blade chassis supporting either POWER7 or (most likely) Nehalem-EX processors. For some reason I don't think IBM will use the cheaper Westmere-EP CPUs for this.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 10:31:41 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1479</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>blandead says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1443</link>
			<description><![CDATA[you know what would be even more interesting a dual core AMD motherboard with two of their 12 core processors... thats 24 cores @ 2.2ghz at a cheaper price then ur silly nehelam-ex setup. okay nehalem is a little faster clock per clock so lets say @2.2 its just as fast as a 2ghz nehalam either way according to you thats 24 mips for how much cheaper.... 8000$ for 2 intel chips or 2600$ hm.... i wonder what i would do with a faster server and still have 5400$ left over oh i know! wait for a quad CPU motherboard to come out and for 5200$ you can have 48mips or 48 cores. these are just processor pricing. If you're not getting the picture here... well just keep pretending AMD doesn't exist and pay 3x more money for only 1/2 the amount of cores. im sure hyperthreading will work it all out right]]></description>
			<dc:creator>blandead</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:36:07 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1443</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1440</link>
			<description><![CDATA[But, the z10 probably costs more than 10 million. And the z11 is only 60% faster. That is dog slow. When we talk about CPU performance. Just add another few Nehalem-EX and you get more CPU power than a shit load expensive IBM Mainframe. You could actually consolidate several Mainframes on a few Nehalem-EX. Not the other way around. The Nehalem-EX has far more processing power than any Mainframe.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:01:56 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1440</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1438</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Also, an independent Linux expert that ported Linux to IBM Mainframes, says that 1 MIPS == 4 MHz 86. That comparison is from 2003, when Pentium4 ruled the earth. A new Nehalem is at least 4 times faster than P4, clock for clock. So, it is safe to say that 1 MIPS == 1 MHz x86. This means that an eight core Nehalem-EX at 2 GHz, has in total: 16.000 Mhz in aggregate Hz. So that would correspond to 16.000 MIPS. Again, we see that you need just a few Intel Nehalem-EX to match a z10 with 64 cpus. http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390@vm.marist.edu/msg18587.html]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:01:03 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1438</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>kebabbert says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1437</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The biggest z10 comes with 64 cpus and gives 28.000 MIPS. An PC with eight Intel Nehalem-EX gives 3.200 MIPS under software emulation. But emulation is 5-10x slower than running native code. If you port Mainframe software to x86, then the PC will run the code 5-10x faster, that is: 16.000-32.000 MIPS. Ergo, you need eight intel Nehalem-EX to match one IBM Mainframe with 64 cpus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TurboHercules#Performance]]></description>
			<dc:creator>kebabbert</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:00:33 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19589-ibm-releases-new-supercomputer#comment-1437</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
