On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:15:22 -0500, Dave Butts wrote:
>
>Workload considerations aside for the moment, do you know if there is any
>sizable amount of CPU lost due to overhead from running on the 8 subcapacity
>engines compared to running on 5 full capacity physical engines only?
You really can't se
I'm sorry. I reread your original post, and I got the 2 turned around. I
kept looking just at the 2 lines where you listed the model numbers, and
just figured the first number was the number of engines. I see that the
last digit is the number of engines.
In answer to your question, each eng
>Workload considerations aside for the moment, do you know if there is any
>sizable amount of CPU lost due to overhead from running on the 8 subcapacity
engines compared to running on 5 full capacity physical engines only?
8 Engines lose more than 5 engines, but the MSU/MIPS ratings take this in
Thanks Eric, I appreciate the answer.
I should clarify my question.
I agree with you, except that the 705 being a 5-way with full capacity engines
vs. a 508 being a 8-way with subcapacity engines.
Workload considerations aside for the moment, do you know if there is any
sizable amount of CPU los
Since no one else has responded, I'll give this a try. As in anything
performance oriented, it always depends on your workload. Since the 2
processors you listed are less than 1% different in total capacity, your
workload is what will make the difference.
Say you have 4 address spaces (CICS,
Regarding the z9, does anyone have a view on running subcapacity engines
vs. full capacity engines?
For example, considering the following:
z9-508 has 352 MSUs (2613 MIPs)
z9-705 has 363 MSUs (2633 MIPs)
The 705 is using 5 full capacity PUs and the 508 is using 8 subcap PUs.
Is there any notice
6 matches
Mail list logo
