Paul Murphy about p570 vs. T5220

Quicksearch

Disclaimer

The individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.

Navigation

< OpenOffice 3.1 | Ask the Oracle CEO - Part 1 >

Paul Murphy about p570 vs. T5220

Thursday, May 7. 2009

Paul Murphy wrote an interesting article about the stuff i´ve reported again and again in my blog. Whatever IBM may tell you, very often it´s an expensive choice. He comes to the same conclusion and ends his article "P570 vs T5220" with the following words:

[..] , the real bottom line here is that only a truly committed IBMer would ever buy a p550/570 combination for something a T2 will do.

ACK!

Posted by Joerg Moellenkamp in English, Sun/Oracle at 20:21 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0)

Defined tags for this entry: ibm

Related entries by tags:

View as PDF: This entry | This month | Full blog

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Schon etwas älter:
March 12th, 2009

und z.Zt. 26 negative Bewertungen, da scheinen wohl nur IBMle zu lesen ^^

#1 Alex on 2009-05-08 00:30 (Reply)

1. I know ... but i thought, it would be interesting to publish it here ... doesn´t make the artcle wrong

2. You would react the same when you get insulted at the end of the article

#2 Joerg+M. (Homepage) on 2009-05-08 06:21 (Reply)

Question 1:
If you compare 570s with T5220/5240s, why keep those M-series servers around? You should compare the 570 with the M5000 or similar. The closest competitor to the the T5220 is a stack of cheapo 1U Dell Intel-servers of which you get about 60 for the price of one 5220. That is what they are for, running mutli-threaded apache-servers and the like. It is just commodity HW where you look for the optimum of cost/CPU-power. Serious business is run on the M-series or the Power-servers. A single thread on the 1,4GHz T2 is about as fast as a 700MHz SPARC64.

Question 2:
If you repeatedly cite Paul Murphy, the worst Sun zealot on the internet, how does this reflect on you?

#3 cfgmgr on 2009-05-08 11:15 (Reply)

Answer to Question 1: The idea wasn´t an idea of Sun or Paul Murphy, it was IBMs own idea, when the compared their p570 to the T5440 (Murphy refers to this benchmark in his article). Thus it was just using their own idea agains them. I find it really strange that the IBM zealots say "use M5000" or "use T5220" dependent whats more positive for them. And by the way: App servers are quite good jobs for the T-Class. There are many T-class server in business-critical non-webserver usage ...

Answer to Question 2: I know that some of the comments of Paul Murphy are borderline. But: A true word of a zealot is stll a zealot.

And don´t forget ... i´m a Sun employee ... i´m partisan

#4 Joerg+M. (Homepage) on 2009-05-08 16:37 (Reply)

It wasn't IBMs idea, it was a reader of Murphys blog who compared the p550 to the T5440, two machines that are similarly priced. Then Murph goes on and cherry picks some numbers comparing the p570(which is a whole other beast) with the T5220. But that is the Murph we know and love.

I work with these CMT machines every day and I think they are great. No doubt that SUN has done a good job there. IBM doesn't really have any Power machines that can directly counter the T5240/5440. Maybe that will change with the Power7 architecture? I don't know.

I still think the closest competitor to the CMT-machines are Intel/Linux. But if the price tag isn't really an issue or if you set a really high value on power/space savings, I agree that a 5440 would be a good choice.

#5 cfgmgr on 2009-05-09 10:18 (Reply)

Well, when i start up a google search about p570 and T5440 then i find this comparision made by IBM quite often. Even where the M-class would be really the better choice. When they want to brag about their single-thread performance they seem to never never use the M-Class for comparision. Really strange. I know that both systems aren´t comparable. A p570 is a different class of machine. But please tell this fact to IBM as well. Recently i found an IBM marketing article where they bragged about the higher number of PCI slots in the p570 compared to an T5440.

#5.1 Joerg Moellenkamp (Homepage) on 2009-05-09 10:42 (Reply)

Well SUN compares the p570 and CMT as well. Comparisons between M-series and pSeries are found on both sites. And at HP they compare Proliant to the 5440 which seems more sensible. It's a mess and I think one must conclude that a little bit of thinking is required.

My original point stands. CMT versus p570 for web-apps is not an interesting comparison.

#5.1.1 cfgmgr on 2009-05-09 12:11 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_.
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry