Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Intel

Going Itanium 2? 17

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Going Itanium 2?

Comments Filter:
  • Depends... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ivan256 ( 17499 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2002 @07:59PM (#4457795)
    If you're planning on running custom code that needs insanely fast FP performance and isn't easily distributable, or you absolutely need 64-bit hardware, then you should go for it. Otherwise, they're overpriced and you should get something else.

    Itanium will likely end up filling the markes previously occupied by Alpha, PA-RISC, and some MIPS-64 platforms. They seem to be using the same design and marketing paradigm. (Proprietary platform. High performace. High price.) The types of people that you are probably thinking of when you say "enthusiast" aren't going to be able to afford one of these.
  • by carlmenezes ( 204187 ) on Tuesday October 15, 2002 @09:17PM (#4458252) Homepage
    1) Does the server work with quantities of data that would make it inconvenient to use a 32-bit proc? If so, yes you need an Itanium. I'd say wait for the AMD-Hammer too and the inevitable price drop ;)
    2) Have you looked at clustering? This might be a good alternative too if you have a lot of number-crunching to do.
    3) If you're looking at databases, I'd suggest looking at "a 64 bit proc", not necessarily the Itanium.

    to cut a long story short - what you REALLY want to look is if you really do need a 64 bit proc and if you do, don't necessarily look at Intel - check out the competition too and go for the one that gives you the best performance for your particular application- I'm assuming price doesn't matter that much here.
  • by megabeck42 ( 45659 ) on Wednesday October 16, 2002 @12:30AM (#4459364)
    Frankly, If you have tasks that require a 64 bit processor, there are a number of better options than the itanium. In all likelihood, if you really NEED 64 bit, you probably have large memory demands, at least, more than 3 gb/process. There are a number of architectures that would be more cost effective. For example, you may be able to make do with a Xeon solution. Of course, it may require you to adapt your application to work with the paging model (you're still limited to 32 bit pointers.)

    If you need real 64 bit pointers, consider Sun or IBM, SGI, etc. Some information about what you want to do or how much money you have to spend would be more useful.

    If you absolutely need 64 bit data types, and less than 3 gb of ram, use PPC's. They have a 64bit/32bit split. 32bit address space, 64 bit data types.

    Remember, 64 bit processors are not inherantly faster than 32 bit ones. In fact, if you have no real dependency on 64 bit processors, then get a bunch of 32 bit processors. Get extra for redundancy, parralel processing, or as a spare space warmer.

    Remember, the more established options are generally a better idea. They're mass-produced, cheaper, more supported, more spares, etc.

    I doubt there's any application that specifically requires an Itanium. Evaluate what you need, and purchase appropriately.

BLISS is ignorance.

Working...