sun4v vs. sun4u - SUN

This is a discussion on sun4v vs. sun4u - SUN ; Hi there ! Can anybody tell me what exactly (besides the virtualization hypervisor) the main potential advantage of the sun4v CPUs is? I heard rumors that they are markably slower than current US IV+ for certain applications - but I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: sun4v vs. sun4u

  1. sun4v vs. sun4u

    Hi there !

    Can anybody tell me what exactly (besides the virtualization hypervisor)
    the main potential advantage of the sun4v CPUs is? I heard rumors that they
    are markably slower than current US IV+ for certain applications - but I
    don't know what "certain" means. IOW: is the above allegation true and if
    yes, is there a rule of thumb when to use which CPU?

    TIA

    fw

  2. Re: sun4v vs. sun4u

    On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Frank Winkler wrote:

    > Can anybody tell me what exactly (besides the virtualization hypervisor) the
    > main potential advantage of the sun4v CPUs is? I heard rumors that they are
    > markably slower than current US IV+ for certain applications - but I don't
    > know what "certain" means. IOW: is the above allegation true and if yes, is
    > there a rule of thumb when to use which CPU?


    Sun4v is the newer "CMT" CoolThreads CPU; Sun4u (US IV+) is the more tarditional
    dual-core CPU. Your reseller should advise you on this, but as a rule of thumb,
    use sun4v when throughput and/or power efficiency is more important than the
    performance of a single thread.

    --
    Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member

    CEO,
    My Online Home Inventory

    Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
    URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
    http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com

  3. Re: sun4v vs. sun4u

    On Jun 21, 3:28 pm, Frank Winkler wrote:

    > Can anybody tell me what exactly (besides the virtualization hypervisor)
    > the main potential advantage of the sun4v CPUs is? I heard rumors that they
    > are markably slower than current US IV+ for certain applications - but I
    > don't know what "certain" means. IOW: is the above allegation true and if
    > yes, is there a rule of thumb when to use which CPU?


    The *current* situation (which is changing fast) is that US IV+ has
    higher single-thread performance, and better floating point
    performance (because it has more FPUs per core) than Niagara. It also
    scales to larger SMP systems (but if you're in the market for one of
    these you probably know). Niagara does fantastically well for loads
    where there are many threads doing mostly integer work, which turns
    out to ba a lot of systems.

    --tim


  4. Re: sun4v vs. sun4u

    Tim Bradshaw wrote:

    >The *current* situation (which is changing fast) is that US IV+ has
    >higher single-thread performance, and better floating point
    >performance (because it has more FPUs per core) than Niagara. It also


    I see - thanks!

    >these you probably know). Niagara does fantastically well for loads
    >where there are many threads doing mostly integer work, which turns
    >out to ba a lot of systems.


    We're about to offer some machines to a customer. He wants to replace old
    boxes doing networking stuff (FW, proxy, etc.) by new ones and I was
    wondering what CPU is the better choice. I suppose those apps will mostly
    do integer ops so a T[12]000 would be fine? OTOH, I'm not sure how good
    CheckPoint, squid and the like are in multi-threading ...

    Regards

    fw

  5. Re: sun4v vs. sun4u

    On Jun 25, 11:21 am, Frank Winkler
    wrote:

    >
    > We're about to offer some machines to a customer. He wants to replace old
    > boxes doing networking stuff (FW, proxy, etc.) by new ones and I was
    > wondering what CPU is the better choice. I suppose those apps will mostly
    > do integer ops so a T[12]000 would be fine? OTOH, I'm not sure how good
    > CheckPoint, squid and the like are in multi-threading ...


    I think that would be a canoncal example of where they'd be a win, yes.


+ Reply to Thread