main

IBM breaks silence on server speed

NTUsEr   on 27 March 2003 - 20:19 · 10 comments & 277 views

Advertisement (Why?)
IBM posted long-awaited performance scores Wednesday for its x440 server with 16 Intel Xeon processors, a system Big Blue is using to try to impose itself on a key part of the server market.

The system was able to perform 151,000 database transactions per minute, according to the scores. That's ahead of a rival 8-Xeon Hewlett-Packard DL760 G2 that clocked in at 115,000, but still behind the 32-Xeon Unisys Orion 230 that racked up 234,000 transactions.

The $1.7 million IBM system's score was about one-third of that posted by the highest-ranked system overall, a huge 128-processor Unix server from Fujitsu that comes with a $12 million price tag. The benchmark, or speed measurement, test was designed by the Transaction Processing Performance Council. Server makers can spend millions of dollars preparing for the widely watched TPC-C test. Although the benchmark results can be somewhat inflated through careful tuning and the use of unusual storage systems on the part of manufacturers, a good score can't be achieved without a good system.

IBM's x440 is the spearhead of a campaign by the company to conquer the market for Intel-based servers. For years, the capabilities of Intel servers weren't far removed from those of ordinary PCs, but IBM, HP, Dell Computer, Microsoft, Intel and component maker ServerWorks have been coaxing the systems' features closer to those of more powerful Unix machines.

News source: C|net


Only a limited number of these cards with 256MB of DDR-II RAM will be produced and sold. The MSRP for these is estimated at $599 USD.

An unconfirmed report regarding another AIB partner states that they are investigating the use of 256MB of 128-bit chips and using a "dual-channel" approach. This would lead to no actual performance benefit, and most likely will lead to decreased performance. However, just being able to say that they are using DDR-II may mean more sales to the unsuspecting consumer.


Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 10 additional comments
#1 -=||MIKE||=- on 27 Mar 2003 - 21:29
what does cheese got to do with it, WHALE ! no leave me alone u silly goose
#2 Drestin on 27 Mar 2003 - 21:53
And what OS did Big Blue use to perform this feat? Was it their own AIX? Nope. Was it their new hobby, Linux? Nope. They used a beta version of Windows 2003.
(3 replies) #3 Michael Lerner on 27 Mar 2003 - 22:45
Which proves Windows r0xorz
#3.1 warr on 28 Mar 2003 - 04:57
your brain is really that simple.
#3.2 JaggedFlame on 28 Mar 2003 - 05:46
About as simple as yours, which is the exact same rationale supporting the opposite argument.
#3.3 MZatko55 on 28 Mar 2003 - 18:44
No, you're simple. IBM rules the UNIX market in performance right now. It would have nothing to prove and would only provide a benchmark essentially to compete with itself. Dumbass.
#4 paulhaskew on 27 Mar 2003 - 23:43
heh, i like that, windows is great specially 2003 server...
(1 reply) #5 nacs on 28 Mar 2003 - 04:23
[quote]The $1.7 million IBM system's score was [i]about one-third[/i] of that posted by the highest-ranked system overall[/quote] Yeah, I guess the IBM was running Windows. Any other OS and it would have been #1 in speed.
#5.1 Drestin on 28 Mar 2003 - 18:55
[QUOTE]Any other OS and it would have been #1 in speed[/QUOTE] You didn't notice/calcuate that it was 1/3 as fast as the top machine which cost [B]more than 6x[/B] as much. So, that works out to twice as good as the top performer on a price/performance ratio.
#6 David3k on 28 Mar 2003 - 04:41
man, don't you wish you had that machine when playing UT2k3?

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)