Microcontrollers/ASICs v. General Purpose Microprocessors -- WAS: Opteron Vs. Athlon X2
"Bryan J. Smith" <[email protected]> Fri, 9 Dec 2005 01:09:58 -0800 (PST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.redhat.amd64 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
"Bryan J. Smith" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm sorry, but the 3-issue ALU of the Opteron can_not_ do > 7.5 billion LOAD (the slowest part), FETCH-DECODE-XOR (the > most simplistic part) and STOR operations per second! > ... > BTW, with regards to the 333MHz, no offense, but you're > ... there is a _huge_ difference between a CPU and a > microcontroller with ASICs designed specifically for > something. Why use a layer-3 switch? I mean, a layer-2 switch with a router on one port would be cheaper? Why put in a HBA for FC-AL or iSCSI? I mean, with a fast enough system, GbE is only about 100MBps, so why can't a system handle it? After all, TCP segmentation is only like addresses of windows into packets of a larger blocks -- much like sectors are to the windows of partitions on a storage array? Especially when these powerful, costly layer-3 switches only have a 200, 300 ... maybe 400MHz MIPS or ARM/XScale at their cores? So why would anyone consider an Intel IXP for networking equipment anymore than they would an Intel IOP for their storage equipment? I mean, why wouldn't Intel just sell 1 type of XScale, why do they make different versions for communications/networking (IXP) and system/storage (IOP)? The system can handle it, they don't need anything, ASICs and dedicated peripherals and their specialized instructions are useless. Heck, why aren't I using my server as a layer-3/4 router?! Throw in some 4-port GbE cards and I can do it better and cheaper than a layer-3 switch! So why not? -- Bryan P.S. There is a reason why 3Ware calls the Escalade 7000/8000 a "Storage Switch" -- it's design is what you can expect in a layer-3 router. A microcontroller core with ASIC peripherals and SRAM cache (just like network ASICs around a microcontroller core) designed for one thing, queue, move and replicate data. Now I would _not_ use a 7000/8000 series with only 1-4MB of SRAM for RAID-5 anymore than I would/could use a layer-3 Ethernet switch that only has 1-4MB of SRAM for NAT/PAT and network filtering duties. But there are more advanced cards, just like their are more advanced networking equipment -- all often powered by little more than one RISC/microcontroller core of a few hundred MHz. -- Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail mailto:[email protected] | (please excuse any http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers) -- amd64-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list