[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:0.034 / U:2.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site