Hello all,
Are IFL engines slowed down compared to a GP engine?
Phil
Phil,
No.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Phil Tully [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IFL speed.
Hello all,
Are IFL engines slowed down compared to a GP engine?
Phil
They are supposed to be the same speed as the other engines. Except in the
case of the MP3000, which has a full speed IFL (as opposed to the H30 engine
which is half speed)
On Thursday 06 March 2003 11:04 am, you wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Are IFL engines slowed down compared to a GP engine?
>
> Phi
Rich:
They are not just supposed to be the same speed - they are :-)
(with the exception you noted).
Romney
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:21:10 -0600 Rich Smrcina said:
>They are supposed to be the same speed as the other engines. Except in the
>case of the MP3000, which has a full speed IFL (as oppose
is rated at 192 mips.
Best regards,
Bill Stermer
EDS - City of Anaheim
> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Tully [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 06, 2003 9:04 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: IFL speed.
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Are IFL engine
> They are not just supposed to be the same speed - they are :-)
> (with the exception you noted).
All z800 and z900 IFLs run at the full native speed of the processor.
So in the case, e.g., of a 2066-0E1, the zSeries processor runs at 40 MIPS but the IFL
runs at
the equivalent of 185 MIPS.
--
> We were pricing a z800 early last year and I remember somewhere in the reams of
> paper we
were given that one IFL on a 0A1 was rated at 192 mips. I checked the entries in the
Public
Library link at:
> http://www.tech-news.com/
> and they show that a z800 for Linux single processor system is
We have a 2066-0A1 and the s390 engine came with an 80mip limit.
> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Tully [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: IFL speed.
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Are IFL engine
o:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Guanahani 580 - PB - C1274ACJ - Buenos Aires
Argentina
-Mensaje original-
De: Phil Payne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:37 PM
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: IFL speed.
> They are not just supposed to be the same sp
the oa1 is 80 mips but the ifl is a full 182 mips
> -Original Message-
> From: Duff Sr., David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:38 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IFL speed.
>
>
> We have a 2066-0A1 and the s390 engine
192 ? :)
> -Original Message-
> From: Noll, Ralph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IFL speed.
>
>
> the oa1 is 80 mips but the ifl is a full 182 mips
>
> > -Original Messa
I hate to sound stupid but due to age it will be OK. We have just started
installing a z800 which has an IFL engine that is rated at 192 MIPS and a
standard engine rated at 80 MIPS. Are you saying that the IFL speed will
revert to 80 MIPS on this box? If so, then I have been duped big time by
Loren,
No, your IFL will run at its rated speed, and not revert to 80 MIPS.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Loren Charnley, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IFL speed.
I hate to sound stupid but due to age it
Hi Loren,
>From the meetings we had with IBM the IFL speed will remain at 192 mips. The basic
>difference between a CP engine and an IFL engine is that the microcode for the IFL
>engine is modified to only except Linux workloads not "legacy" stuff. If there is
>more magic
ted
> installing a z800 which has an IFL engine that is rated at 192 MIPS and a
> standard engine rated at 80 MIPS. Are you saying that the IFL speed will
> revert to 80 MIPS on this box? If so, then I have been duped big time by
> IBM.
>
> Loren Charnley, Jr.
> Tech Support Admin
IPS. Are you saying that the IFL speed
will
> revert to 80 MIPS on this box? If so, then I have been duped big time
by
> IBM.
IFLs run at the full speed of the box, whether zSeries, 9672, or MP3K.
Your IFL will run at 192 MIPS.
Alan Altmark
Sr. Software Engineer
IBM z/VM Development
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IFL speed.
Hi Loren,
>From the meetings we had with IBM the IFL speed will remain at 192 mips.
The basic difference between a CP engine and an IFL engine is that the
microcode for the IFL engine is modified to only except Linux workloads
not "legacy&qu
ware Specialist
> Maritz Research, Automotive Research Group
> 419-725-4123
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Stermer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IFL speed.
>
> Hi Loren,
>
> From the
On Thursday, 03/06/2003 at 02:43 EST, "Ward, Garry"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, in theory, the CP engine can also run at 192 MIPS, but is
> intentionally restrained?
Right. If you pay more, you get different microcode that yields a faster
machine.
Alan Altmark
Sr. Software Engineer
IBM z/V
As far as I know, that only applies to the 2066-0A1 in the z800 series.
> From: Ward, Garry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So, in theory, the CP engine can also run at 192 MIPS, but is
> intentionally restrained?
>
>
On 07.03.2003 at 06:09:43, "Duff Sr., David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> As far as I know, that only applies to the 2066-0A1 in the z800 series.
There is also 0B1 and 0C1, and the recently-introduced 0E1, all of which are
"sub-uniprocessor".
In addition, there is a 0A2 (I think), a "sub-dyadic"
> Hi Phil,
> We' have a Zserie 900 with 1 IFL.
> IBM said me: 1IFL=250 MIPS.
> Brgds
> Nistor Rubin Acosta
Yes, that's correct. The z900 uses the same processor chip as the z800, but it's
clocked
faster and better packaged.
--
Phil Payne
http://www.isham-research.com
+44 7785 302 803
+4
>
> Yes, that's correct. The z900 uses the same processor chip
> as the z800, but it's clocked
> faster and better packaged.
>
Think there's a jumper or two we could use on the z8s to overclock 'em? ;-)
Leland
> I hate to sound stupid but due to age it will be OK. We have just
> started installing a z800 which has an IFL engine that is rated at 192
> MIPS and a standard engine rated at 80 MIPS. Are you saying that the
> IFL speed will revert to 80 MIPS on this box? If so, then I have been
m: Romney White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:22 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IFL speed.
>
>
> Rich:
>
> They are not just supposed to be the same speed - they are :-)
> (with the exception you noted).
>
> Romney
>
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: IFL speed.
>
>
> Hi Loren,
>
> From the meetings we had with IBM the IFL speed will remain
> at 192 mips. The basic difference between a CP engine and an
> IFL engine
> Yes, that's correct. The z900 uses the same processor chip as the
> z800, but it's clocked faster and better packaged.
Rather than "better packaged" let us say packaged differently. The z900
use a "closed loop" cooling system while z800 is air cooled. Running the
z900 module close to 0c allows u
Thanks for the large number of the same answer. I thought all along
that a z900 IFL was rated the same way as z900 GP. The problem is one
of the salesman told my managment that it ran slower and would not
believe me.
Phil
Romney White wrote:
Rich:
They are not just supposed to be the same
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:27:30 -0600, Lucius, Leland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, that's correct. The z900 uses the same processor chip
as the z800, but it's clocked
faster and better packaged.
Think there's a jumper or two we could use on the z8s to overclock 'em?
;-)
Unfortunately it's in the mi
> Are IFL engines slowed down compared to a GP engine?
Phil:
Amazing the amount of incorrect info on the list on this subject.
IFLs run at "rated speed" of the processor. That is to say, they run as
fast as the standard (or "general purpose") processor on the system can
run. Basically find the s
Is there a site that gives a Mhz rating for the z900 and z9 IFLs?
Dennis Roach
United Space Alliance
600 Gemini Avenue
Mail Code USH-4A3L
Houston, Texas 77058
Voice: (281) 282-2975
Page:(713) 736-8275
Fax: (281) 282-3583
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions expressed by me are mine
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Roach, Dennis
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:43 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: zSeries IFL speed rating
>
>
> Is there a site that gives a Mhz rati
On 7/19/07, Roach, Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a site that gives a Mhz rating for the z900 and z9 IFLs?
Start here I'd say. There's lots of pointers to various tables. What
they talk about is MIPS rate. You can probably also find cycle times
published for different generations,
On 7/19/07, Rob van der Heij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Start here I'd say. There's lots of pointers to various tables.
http://www.isham-research.co.uk/mips_z9.html
--
Rob van der Heij
Velocity Software, Inc
http://velocitysoftware.com/
---
On Thursday, 07/19/2007 at 11:45 EDT, "Roach, Dennis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a site that gives a Mhz rating for the z900 and z9 IFLs?
Since that number would be meaningless, no. I mean, you might find one
floating about out there as a factoid, but it has zero value. Why do you
car
Quoting Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> SLES 10 isn't mentioned. It is a Really Bad Idea to try to install IBM
> middleware on anything other than the supported platforms. (a) It may not
> install, and (2) it isn't supported by the Support Center. The best bet
> is to call it in. Don't wo
manufactured, since
the beginning of time.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 11:01 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject:Re: zSeries IFL speed rating
On Thursday, 07/19/2007 at
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Roach, Dennis
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 11:59 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: zSeries IFL speed rating
>
>
> I have been asked to determine the impro
Roach, Dennis wrote:
I have been asked to determine the improvement of an IFL on a z9 BC over a z900.
Mhz is something the people being presented to understand.
It does not compare to the same speed on say INTEL.
It's still bogus..
If you take Intel processors for example, even then, WITHIN t
ct, natural or manufactured, since
the beginning of time.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 11:01 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject:Re: zSeries IFL speed rating
On Thursday,
cc
07/19/2007 11:58 AM
Subject
Re:
zSe
On 7/19/07, Roach, Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have been asked to determine the improvement of an IFL on a z9 BC over a z900.
Mhz is something the people being presented to understand.
It does not compare to the same speed on say INTEL.
It does not help you a think that people understa
> Is there a site that gives a Mhz rating for the z900 and z9
> IFLs?
Get the zPCR tool from IBM. This is the external version of the
same tool the IBM reps use to compare performance of various
mainframe systems.
http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/PRS1381
Jim
Generally the IFL's are not capped, and the number 450 MIPS seems to
ring a bell.
Doug
At 11:56 AM 7/19/2007, you wrote:
On 7/19/07, Roach, Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a site that gives a Mhz rating for the z900 and z9 IFLs?
Start here I'd say. There's lots of pointers to var
>IBM has those* numbers availble and it is still management meaningful.
Huh? What does that statement even mean?
IBM has numbers, but they're no longer meaningful!
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For LINUX-390 subscribe
that is repeatable and keep using that to test
the speed of your engines. But all numbers must be taken as relative and
with a big grain of salt.
/Tom Kern
/301-903-2211
-- Original Message ---
From: "Roach, Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: zSeries IFL
>>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 6:01 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Doug Fuerst
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Generally the IFL's are not capped, and the number 450 MIPS seems to
> ring a bell.
IFLs, zIIPs, and zAAPs are _never_ capped. They always run at their full rated
speed, even if the CP
> Generally the IFL's are not capped, and the number 450 MIPS seems to ring a
> bell.
But, does it chime in tune?
450 MIPS on a z/990.
585 MIPS on a z/9 EC.
Now, you know!
But, what does it mean?
If you had a workload to compare, it might tell you something.
Otherwise, the 'M' still stands for
07 03:42 PM
Subject
Re:
zSeries IFL speed rating
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
>IBM has those* numbers avai
or.
Tom Kelman
Commerce Bank of Kansas City
(816) 760-7632
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
McKown, John
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 12:13 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: zSeries IFL speed rating
> -Original Message-
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Kelman, Tom
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 8:32 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: zSeries IFL speed rating
>
>
> From Dennis Roach:
>
> "I'd j
On 7/20/07, James Melin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It means that IBM has z9 BC vs z900 performance benchmarks. MHZ ratings are
> not meaningful across processor architetures, and are not management
> meaningful to any useful degree. IBM's benchmarks of performance between a
> z9 BC and a z900
>>> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 2:16 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>, Ted MacNEIL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-snip-
> 585 MIPS on a z/9 EC.
What about on a z9 BC?
> Now, you know!
> But, what does it mean?
> If you had a workload to compare, it might tell you something.
On Friday, 07/20/2007 at 10:51 EDT, "McKown, John"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good point. The marketing people took a very good measure of
> performance, which was originally designed to rationalize "work" across
> multiple different processors and royally . I am
> really beginning to HATE sof
: zSeries IFL speed rating
On Friday, 07/20/2007 at 10:51 EDT, "McKown, John"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good point. The marketing people took a very good measure of
> performance, which was originally designed to rationalize "work" across
> multiple differ
Here is good site that lists some performance guesstimates. Remember
that the specialty engines run at full speed. So in the case of a z/9 EC
the
IFL can be compared to the engine on the model 701, on your z/900 the
engine can be compared to the model 101,1C1 or 2C1 depending on your
current model
Yeah, I'm fresh out of whatever. And I'm running a bit low on stuff,
thingummies, and whatsits, too.
Jon
Not everyone has the time, budget, management patience, or whatever to
do what is needed to get around that.
--
For L
Thomas Kern wrote:
Since Mhz and MIPS are such misused values, I prefer to run the same
program on old and new engines to compare the performance change. I use
an old FORTRAN (no flames please) program that computes pi to 5000
places. A boss once needed something to see if the vendor really did
u
I didn't need a full throughput benchmark, nor did I need to benchmark the I/O
subsystem or the tape drives. The boss asked a specific question about the CPU
power. I found a program that answered his question to his complete
satisfaction. Now if he had asked for a throughput benchmark, an orchestr
59 matches
Mail list logo
