Return to the archive index

Re: Parallel computing?

>>>>> "VP" == Vaughan Pratt <> writes:

VP> These considerations only make sense if you're trying to build
VP> a supercomputer out of a lot of these.  For one computer go for the
VP> JUMPtec 486 unless you really need those cycles.  It's a much smaller
VP> package with less demanding power requirements.

I went from a 486DX2/50 based system to a CELL P166.  Not sure if I
would go back.  I am very happy with the way it uses power.  My only
complaint is the Parvus carryer board I have does not have support for
suspend/resume so I cannot use the suspend features built in to the
P166 - I can suspend with apm, but not resume (standby works fine).  I
am working with Parvis on making the modification.  It would be nice
if I could get "suspend to disk" running for those times when I am
totly away from a power source and running low on battery power, or
when I need to turn it off (airplane takeoff/landing) for a breif
time.  

I do not know about the JUMP but I am finding the P166 uses about the
same power as my 486 did over the course of a day!  It gets things
done faster, and so can go idle more and as such, overall, uses about
the same power.  I know when I did the compairson with several 486 and 586
pc104 boards the P166 came out that I would have to go to a 486/33 to
get better power use.  But again, I have not looked at the specs for
the JUMP board, it may well be optimised more than the boards I
looked at 7 - 8 months ago when I made my choice.

Greg

--
 Greg Priest-Dorman
       NO SOLICITING

--
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail