Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 13 Jun 2001 12:39:01 +0200 | From | Ralf Baechle <> | Subject | Re: Any limitations on bigmem usage? |
| |
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 02:34:40PM -0400, Holzrichter, Bruce wrote:
> > Brilliant. You need what, a 6x larger cache just to break even with > > the amount of time you're running in-cache? > > This may be the wrong platform for this question, but after reading Rob > Landley's note on performance on Itanium and architecture concerns, I am > interested in Kernel hackers who have had to write code for Itanium's > comments on the same, if you are not bound by NDA's. Correct me if I am > wrong, but I thought I saw the announcement that Itanium is shipping. Have > you tested Itanium performance? We have an preproduction unit with quad > Itanium's. I have not had time to benchmark against other units, I am > interested in performance items. Feel free to drop me a line off list if > you can.
A number of Specbench numbers of Itanium systems is now available. Itanium performs relativly bad for the integer numbers compared to the entire competition but is a true fp killer. As a developer I hate that compiling code for Itanium due to the extra complexity of optimization and code generation is way slower than for others CPUs. So all in all Itanium is a two edged sword.
Ralf - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |