Official SPEC scores for the Itanium 2 "Madison"

[Random Variable]

HP Integrity server rx2600 (1.5GHz Itanium 2):

SPECfp2000 (base) - 2119
SPECint2000 (base) - 1322

The peak scores may or may not be identical.

http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/performance/architecture/speccpu.html

 

[Blackberry Junkie]

how does it compare to AMD Opteron?

 

[Random Variable]

Originally posted by: ABETech
how does it compare to AMD Opteron?

http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/

 

[Sunner]

Wow, seriously kickasstastic SPECfp numbers, though Int leaves something to be desired.

 

[Random Variable]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Wow, seriously kickasstastic SPECfp numbers, though Int leaves something to be desired.

The integer performance of the 1.5 GHz Itanium 2 is significantly greater than the integer performance of the 1GHz Itanium 2.

 

[dexvx]

Well. I wonder what the Mac owners will say about their little G5 super computer

Btw, the Power4 listed there has 128MB L3 cache.

 

[Random Variable]

"Btw, the Power4 listed there has 128MB L3 cache."

That cache is shared by 8 processors.

 

[Sohcan]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Wow, seriously kickasstastic SPECfp numbers, though Int leaves something to be desired.

Madison posts the highest SPECint score, nearly 65% higher performance than the 1-year-old McKinley (impressive given the industry average is 40% - 50% improvement per year), and you're still not impressed? What do you want us to do, Sunner?

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: dexvx
Well. I wonder what the Mac owners will say about their little G5 super computer

Btw, the Power4 listed there has 128MB L3 cache.

A single high-end Itanium costs more than the highest end G5 Power Mac($4227 for a 1.5ghz 6MB L3, vs. $3000 for the whole Power Mac), which isn't surprising considering they're not even in the same market. That said, I doubt many people will even think of a comparison.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: dexvx
Well. I wonder what the Mac owners will say about their little G5 super computer

Btw, the Power4 listed there has 128MB L3 cache.

A single high-end Itanium costs more than the highest end G5 Power Mac($4227 for a 1.5ghz 6MB L3, vs. $3000 for the whole Power Mac), which isn't surprising considering they're not even in the same market. That said, I doubt many people will even think of a comparison.

I was comparing it with a chip that was in the same range, the Power4 flagship CPU by IBM. If you want to compare it to the magical G5 that Apple is talking about that is supposedly a "supercomputer", the SPEC numbers are about 850fp/800int. Besides, I'm sure there will be a "low cache" lower priced version of the Itanium that wont effect SPEC scores by too much. Namely the 1.5Ghz/1.5MB L3 chip.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: dexvx
Well. I wonder what the Mac owners will say about their little G5 super computer

Btw, the Power4 listed there has 128MB L3 cache.

A single high-end Itanium costs more than the highest end G5 Power Mac($4227 for a 1.5ghz 6MB L3, vs. $3000 for the whole Power Mac), which isn't surprising considering they're not even in the same market. That said, I doubt many people will even think of a comparison.

I was comparing it with a chip that was in the same range, the Power4 flagship CPU by IBM. If you want to compare it to the magical G5 that Apple is talking about that is supposedly a "supercomputer", the SPEC numbers are about 850fp/800int. Besides, I'm sure there will be a "low cache" lower priced version of the Itanium that wont effect SPEC scores by too much. Namely the 1.5Ghz/1.5MB L3 chip.

? Whatchoo talkin' 'bout Willis? See your own earlier post.

A G5 isn't a POWER4. The POWER4 and Itanium 2 are computational monsters (the latter more so than the former of course) but I don't see too many people trying to run POWER4s or Itanium 2s in their home computers.

BTW, there isn't any supercomputer marketing for the G5 either.

 

[Pariah]

Do you feel you have some sort of moral obligation to rebuttal every non-positive Apple related post? No matter how much you crusade for them, you're not going to sway any opinions. If people don't like Apple products, who cares? If you like them that much, it's their loss, not yours. Just leaves more for you to buy.

 

[Corporate Thug]

very impressive, who will be the first to get own3d?

 

[Harabecw]

Is IA-64 Intel's way for desktops too or will they go with something similar to the Athlon64?

(or direct me to a roadmap, please

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Harabecw
Is IA-64 Intel's way for desktops too or will they go with something similar to the Athlon64?

(or direct me to a roadmap, please

intel roadmap

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Pariah
Do you feel you have some sort of moral obligation to rebuttal every non-positive Apple related post? No matter how much you crusade for them, you're not going to sway any opinions. If people don't like Apple products, who cares? If you like them that much, it's their loss, not yours. Just leaves more for you to buy.

Sorry, I just calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Since when is a G5 a POWER4, or even in the same league as one, as his post insinuated? He would be perfectly correct to say the Itanium 2 is faster here than the POWER4, but of course the G5 comment is completely irrelevant.

P.S. IBM just issued a press release too. See here. What they're claiming is that the POWER4 has the best price performance ratio. They're talking a 16-chip (32 cores) AIX DB2 system, vs. a 64-chip HP Itanium 2 system.

 

[dexvx]

The Power4 is perfectly within the league of an Itanium II. Those 2 processors are direct competitors. The G5 is derived from the Power4. While it may be a cut cost version of the real thing, there are also "value" versions of the Itanium II, like the 1.3Ghz/3MB cache version. Last time I checked the HP website, those were available for under $7000, but include 2GB DDR ECC Ram, a ATI FireGL X1, and a U320 15K SCSI interface. The price will only go down in the forseeable future, as witness to the plummetting prices of the McKinley Itanium II's.

Ironic that the G4 was a "Supercomputer" and the G5 isnt. Apple must've scaled back.

 

[Sohcan]

Originally posted by: dexvx
Last time I checked the HP website, those were available for under $7000, but include 2GB DDR ECC Ram, a ATI FireGL X1, and a U320 15K SCSI interface. The price will only go down in the forseeable future, as witness to the plummetting prices of the McKinley Itanium II's.

Actually the base HP zx6000 workstation with a 1.3 GHz / 3 MB L3 Madison runs a hair under $5000.

Otherwise I'm getting out of here...it's getting a bit too hot.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: dexvx
The Power4 is perfectly within the league of an Itanium II. Those 2 processors are direct competitors. The G5 is derived from the Power4. While it may be a cut cost version of the real thing, there are also "value" versions of the Itanium II, like the 1.3Ghz/3MB cache version. Last time I checked the HP website, those were available for under $7000, but include 2GB DDR ECC Ram, a ATI FireGL X1, and a U320 15K SCSI interface. The price will only go down in the forseeable future, as witness to the plummetting prices of the McKinley Itanium II's.

Ironic that the G4 was a "Supercomputer" and the G5 isnt. Apple must've scaled back.

the defintion of supercomputer was changed.

 

[Eug]

Yeah, but a PPC 970 is NOT in the same league as the POWER4 or the Itanium 2. It's not just a "cut cost" version of the POWER4. It is based on POWER4 technology of course, but the aim is a completely different market as I'm sure you're already aware.

Don't expect Dell to start making "cut cost" Itanium 2 desktops for the home any time soon.

 

[Random Variable]

The base price of a HP Itanium 2 "Madison" workstation is $4,896, while the base price of a HP Itanium 2 "McKinley" workstation is $3,298.

http://www.hp.com/workstations/itanium/index.html

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: Pariah
Do you feel you have some sort of moral obligation to rebuttal every non-positive Apple related post? No matter how much you crusade for them, you're not going to sway any opinions. If people don't like Apple products, who cares? If you like them that much, it's their loss, not yours. Just leaves more for you to buy.

So why is wrong for Eug to "defend" Apple when it is completely acceptable for the many fanATIcs here at AT to post anti-NVidia drivel in any thread about NVidia products? I'd like to see you wade into THOSE threads with this logic. Seriously I would. No one can like their favorite products nowadays without being attacked for it.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Pariah
Do you feel you have some sort of moral obligation to rebuttal every non-positive Apple related post? No matter how much you crusade for them, you're not going to sway any opinions. If people don't like Apple products, who cares? If you like them that much, it's their loss, not yours. Just leaves more for you to buy.

Sorry, I just calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Since when is a G5 a POWER4, or even in the same league as one, as his post insinuated? He would be perfectly correct to say the Itanium 2 is faster here than the POWER4, but of course the G5 comment is completely irrelevant.

P.S. IBM just issued a press release too. See here. What they're claiming is that the POWER4 has the best price performance ratio. They're talking a 16-chip (32 cores) AIX DB2 system, vs. a 64-chip HP Itanium 2 system.

Who cares? I don't see people on these boards lining up for any of these products. What does the G5 have to do with Madison SPEC performance? Just because one person posts a random one line off topic comment doesn't mean Apple needs the OJ defense team defending them. Let it go, it's not that big a deal either way. It's not like anyone here has extensive experience with all these systems to be able to even give an informed performance opinion that isn't completely worthless anyway.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: Megatomic

Originally posted by: Pariah
Do you feel you have some sort of moral obligation to rebuttal every non-positive Apple related post? No matter how much you crusade for them, you're not going to sway any opinions. If people don't like Apple products, who cares? If you like them that much, it's their loss, not yours. Just leaves more for you to buy.

So why is wrong for Eug to "defend" Apple when it is completely acceptable for the many fanATIcs here at AT to post anti-NVidia drivel in any thread about NVidia products? I'd like to see you wade into THOSE threads with this logic. Seriously I would. No one can like their favorite products nowadays without being attacked for it.

It was one random comment that had nothing to do with the original thread. It's people who have to respond religiously to every non-positive post that has turned these boards into a constant flame fest. Be the bigger man and just ignore it once in a while and the garbage will stop.

 

[Eug]

Who cares? I don't see people on these boards lining up for any of these products. What does the G5 have to do with Madison SPEC performance? Just because one person posts a random one line off topic comment doesn't mean Apple needs the OJ defense team defending them. Let it go, it's not that big a deal either way. It's not like anyone here has extensive experience with all these systems to be able to even give an informed performance opinion that isn't completely worthless anyway

I don't get it. I correct a blatantly misleading statement and all h3ll breaks loose.

Ironically, I was pointing out after all that the G5 has nothing to do with Madison SPEC performance (or POWER4 SPEC performance), and furthermore agreed that the Itanium 2 is FAST.

Personally, I think if there is something wrong, it deserves to be corrected. Isn't the purpose of a forum "discussion"?