|
Hi Neil, I think the analogy would be comparing horsepower of the engine, not overall performance of the vehicle. Regards, Peter Dow Dow Software Services, Inc. 909 425-0194 voice 909 425-0196 fax ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Palmer" <neilp@dpslink.com> To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 3:44 PM Subject: Re: How are CPU Speed and Overall CPW Related? > PC vs 400. You're trying to compare the performance of a motorcycle to a > bus. Are zero to 60 times meaningful in this comparison? > What about miles per gallon. Now what about passenger miles per gallon. > Admittedly with one passenger in the bus the numbers may not look good in > comparison to the motorcycle - but what if you need to move 60 passengers. > > > ...Neil > . > > > > > "Nathan M. Andelin" <nathanma@haaga.com> > Sent by: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com > 2001/05/02 18:03 > Please respond to MIDRANGE-L > > > To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com> > cc: > Subject: Re: How are CPU Speed and Overall CPW Related? > > > > From: Jim Damato <jdamato@dollargeneral.com> > > > In your opinion, what do you think is the reason that > > IBM is governing the CPU? Is there a technical reason > > why they would want to do it? > > With all due respect to Alexei Pytel, I believe "governor" is the correct > term. My hypothesis is that the standard CPU would do more, given more > cache. I can't think of a technical reason for limiting cache. But maybe > there's a business reason, which I don't understand. I'd like an > explanation too. > > I believe that if IBM offered better performance for the price, then it > would attract new customers to the platform. But IBM is in a better > position than I to make that call. > > > Is this what you mean, or are you talking about something > > far less nefarious? > > The thing that bothers me is the obfuscation. Customers should have good > information, but they don't. For example, I recall a thread in which > Patrick Townsend expressed confusion over a C program he wrote to do some > work with stream files. He compiled the program to run on both Intel and > AS/400. It blew him away that the Intel processor offered so much > superior > performance. Now it makes sense to me. The AS/400 had a much slower > processor, which was also probably bridled. > > I believe that kind of confusion is widespread. Customers believe they > are > buying "Big Iron", but what they getting is "Little Copper". > > I appreciate how IBM provides CPW figures to compare one model to the > next. > But IBM seems to either hide or obscure numbers that compare the AS/400 to > Intel. > > Nathan. > > > +--- > | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com > +--- +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.