|
|
VT's G5 Cluster Upgrade...
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Japan
Status:
Offline
|
|
Does anyone else think the Virginia Tech has the world's biggest case of upgraditis?
What's it been, 3 months? Tops! I mean it isn't even a new processor, just a new enclosure.
I always thought they were foolish for not waiting for the G5 Xserve. Especially when you see how massive the room has to be. But, man oh man, that is one expensive upgrade. I kept my TiBook 400 for only two and half years before getting a 12 inch PB (DVI) and I thought I had a little bit of upgraditits, but by comparison this makes me look like a luddite.
|
12 Powerbook rev. B
17 LCD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status:
Offline
|
|
It was part of the plan. they had agreed with apple to buy g5 xserves long before they installed the powermacs.
|
Aloha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apple are taking the G5S back and giving them a special deal.
The problem revolves around heat, and more importantly the lack of EEC memory on the Powemacs... Not important on desktops, but critical for a supercomputer.
It was meaning that the cluster could not be used for calculations lasting over about 1 hour with any kind of accuracy.
Peace,
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Japan
Status:
Offline
|
|
I have no doubt the Xserve makes a much better cluster and has numerous benefits over a room full of the beast-size cases. But I had read (and I for sure could be wrong) that they were going to find a "good home" for those desktops. And "they" are not Apple but VT.
So, what was the plan? Isn't that a stiff price to pay for a couple of months of supercomputing power considering those G5's won't fetch near the price they paid for them?
|
12 Powerbook rev. B
17 LCD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Retired.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'd love to get my hands on one of these now "famous" G5's if Apple is going to refurb them out the door at a good price...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Flint, MI
Status:
Offline
|
|
Smaller form factor, lower power requirements, ECC memory, more tolerant chips. They'll probably recoup the cost of upgrading in the lower power bill alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by iNub:
Smaller form factor, lower power requirements, ECC memory, more tolerant chips. They'll probably recoup the cost of upgrading in the lower power bill alone.
no joke. Especially in not just the machines, but that fancy cooling system they installed to cool the room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
One of the reasons (maybe the only reason) for going with the G5 was the need to make the supercomputer list by a certain date. Making the list = money. Therefore for a pittance they make the list by using the G5, and then upgrade to something better, the XServe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|