SO let me get this right. I've been reading a bit more on this stuff and it goes like this.
The term "dinosaur" refered to IBM mainframes doesn't just refer to them going out of style, It refers to the fact that it is a gigantic computer system controlled by a tiny brain.
Each disk controller does all the hardwork of shuffling information around, unlike the PC's were everything is proccessed thru the CPU..
The strength of the Mainframe is pure I/O power, not proccessing power. Kinda like Pc's in with 3-d graphics, if we relied on our main proccessor to run all the 3-d graphics, quake2 would be to much for our computers to handle with nice colors and high resolutions we expect. So we have dedicated hardware soly designed to proccess 3-d graphics, these graphics require a gigantic memory bus so that is all kept on the video card. Each itteration of directx and newer generation of video cards requires the cpu to do less and less work to produce excelent results.
Such is the way that the IBM mainframe functions. Each disk controller does all the grunt work, it's designed specificly for running the disks and such, so that the cpu is kept from having to worry about these things. That's how a mainframe can get all that work done.
So comparing a beowolf cluster, or a PC to a Mainframe is a apple and oranges comparision. Tasks at which a Mainframe would be suited at would geek a PC out, and a PC cluster can run rings around a Mainframe in terms of perfomance that we PC users are acustom to.
How accurate is that?
The term "dinosaur" refered to IBM mainframes doesn't just refer to them going out of style, It refers to the fact that it is a gigantic computer system controlled by a tiny brain.
Each disk controller does all the hardwork of shuffling information around, unlike the PC's were everything is proccessed thru the CPU..
The strength of the Mainframe is pure I/O power, not proccessing power. Kinda like Pc's in with 3-d graphics, if we relied on our main proccessor to run all the 3-d graphics, quake2 would be to much for our computers to handle with nice colors and high resolutions we expect. So we have dedicated hardware soly designed to proccess 3-d graphics, these graphics require a gigantic memory bus so that is all kept on the video card. Each itteration of directx and newer generation of video cards requires the cpu to do less and less work to produce excelent results.
Such is the way that the IBM mainframe functions. Each disk controller does all the grunt work, it's designed specificly for running the disks and such, so that the cpu is kept from having to worry about these things. That's how a mainframe can get all that work done.
So comparing a beowolf cluster, or a PC to a Mainframe is a apple and oranges comparision. Tasks at which a Mainframe would be suited at would geek a PC out, and a PC cluster can run rings around a Mainframe in terms of perfomance that we PC users are acustom to.
How accurate is that?
