This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test!
- From: Laurent GUERBY <laurent at guerby dot net>
- To: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- Cc: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>, Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>, Bradley Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>, Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:10:59 +0100
- Subject: Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test!
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403250430380.28065-100000@www.eyesopen.com> <1080343224.27851.278.camel@pc> <20040326155319.A18029@synopsys.com>
On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 00:53, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 12:20:24AM +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > Economics. Less true nowadays with Apple decision to sell cheap bi G5
> > systems, but then it's reflected in the TOP500 with a very nice spot for
> > G5.
>
> IBM has a plan to take the #1 spot once the BlueGene project is complete
> next year; their architecture is PowerPC based (each of its processor
> chips has two PowerPC processors on the chip). Their 1/128th scale
> prototype is already #73.
That's nice but economics still requires a price tag, and IBM being
the only provider of this technology means the price will likely be high
and most people will still buy x86 boxes (well x86_64 boxes of 2005, you
can buy today 1U quad opterons*), up to a certain size where energy and
space requirements will dictate something else.
Laurent
* http://www.appro.com/product/server_1142h.asp
no idea if it works :)