Going Itanium 2?

Marcel Turcotte asks: "I am buying equipments for a new lab. Last year, when we applied for funding, we included an Itanium based server in our budget. Now that the money has arrived, I am not so sure that Itanium is the way to go. Although there are great machines, such as the HP rx5670 running Linux, people don't seem enthusiast about the chip. I am wondering how the acceptance of the IA-64 compares with the acceptance of other chips."

Can't rule out AMD

[DRnetman86]

While the Itanium 2 does look quite enticing, what about AMD's Hammer series? It should have lower power consumption, work with x86 programs, and you know the rest. Even Linus posted that he thinks that the Hammers will be better than Intel in the 64 bit market. Don't solely go with Intel.

Usage details required

[Lao-Tzu]

If the server is going to be needed for tasks that a 64 bit processor would help with, then an Itanium might not be a bad idea. However, I'd be surprised if it would be worth the cost unless you have very specific applications planned for the machine. I'd suggest that using the extra money to invest in a larger multiprocessor server might be more flexible and useful in the wide range of tasks that a server in a University lab is bound to be exposed to.

Of course, since I'm at Carleton, I'll say anything to try to stop U of Ottawa from having hardware I can't get my hands on. ;)