UltraSparc II vs Pentium II/III

[randumb]

I was wondering what Pentium II or III would have the equivalent performance of an UltraSparc II 300MHz in a server environment.

 

[techfuzz]

Dude, you're comparing apples to oranges, or RISC to CISC as the case may be. Also the Sun chips has 2MB cache where Pentium II/III's had at most 512K AND it's 64-bit compared to 32-bit. There is no solid comparison between the two.

techfuzz

 

[randumb]

I know that they're different processors in many ways, but i did say web server performances. That's something you can compare them on.

 

[techfuzz]

Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation - These guys maintain benchmarks for all kinds of applications and hardware. Find the appropriate benchmark and compare them. That's quite an old processor so you'll probably have to dig.

techfuzz

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: techfuzz
Also the Sun chips has 2MB cache where Pentium II/III's had at most 512K

Tell that to the IBM NetFinity 8500R in my server room with Quad PIII Xeon 2MB Caches in it.


At any rate, I don't think the PIIIs ever clocked high enough to outperform the UltraSparc IIs. The thing is, most server ops are RISC processes, which is why way lower clocked RISC processors can outperform much much high-clocked CISC processors on the server side. Of course, with no constant updating competition between processor manufacturers, they've lost a lot of ground lately.

 

[pspada]

a PIII and a PIII Zeon are 2 different animals too.

 

[techfuzz]

Originally posted by: chsh1ca

Originally posted by: techfuzz
Also the Sun chips has 2MB cache where Pentium II/III's had at most 512K

Tell that to the IBM NetFinity 8500R in my server room with Quad PIII Xeon 2MB Caches in it.

The PIII and PIII Xeon are two different chips and there was no mention of Xeon in the original question.

techfuzz