At 05:06 PM 12/6/2002, you wrote:
> Good reading..... > http://www.internetwk.com/webDev/INW20021205S0005 > Cobalt boxes are run on AMD CPU'S right? Gosh .. I didn't realise I'd subscribed to paul-jacobs-thought-of-the-day@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Several points: 1) Oh golly, yes, sorry, I'm going to say it again. THIS HAS /NOTHING/ to do with security. If you're going to post, post on a relevant list. 2) Hyperthreading is far from proven to give a significant increase. Current benchmarks range from worse performance to + ~15% dependent upon the task in question. 3) Do you have any proof that the Intel compiler, $399, is any better than gcc, free, shipped with the RaQs? And please note that 'better' != makes smaller/faster code.
Why does better have to be smaller?, faster yes I agree!.
4) How is this relevant? You're right in that the RaQ we use has a K6. Why should I be interested in a technology that the box we've already bought doesn't support?
Maybe sun should look at supporting it, that's all... they do want to keep up with technology right?
Anyway, this is largely pointless as I know you're going to reply to this e-mail, quoting the whole thing, with a one-line reply ... which probably /still/ won't be relevant. *shakes head, gives up* Have a wonderful day, John P.S. Yes, I'm trying to be polite. Please stop posting off-topic stuff to the cobalt-security list on the assumption that we'll find it interesting*. *: Random sample: http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-security/2002-December/006932.html http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-security/2002-November/006707.html http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-security/2002-November/006747.html http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-security/2002-November/006774.html http://list.cobalt.com/pipermail/cobalt-security/2002-November/006819.html _______________________________________________ cobalt-security mailing list cobalt-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-security