View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Chewy2k n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2004 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 12:22 pm Post subject: Which Ultra? |
|
|
Hi all,
I'm currently looking at getting a Sun Ultra workstation mainly to run Gentoo. I'm more or less split between a Ultra 2 and an Ultra 5, the Ultra 2 having 2x 200mhz, 512 RAM, 4gig SCSI, and the Ultra 5 having a 360mhz, 256mb and 9gig IDE. 4 gig HDD space would probably do me. The different monitor connections don't bother me much, I think I've got all that sorted.
Thanks for your advice. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pmjdebruijn Guru
Joined: 24 Jul 2003 Posts: 506 Location: Sittard, The Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm no Sun expert...
But generally dual processor machines totally rock... (Assuming Linux supports UltraSPARC SMP).
More ram is nice...
4GB HDD should be enough to build a gentoo system on.
Regards,
Pascal de Bruijn |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sparc-kly n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2004 Posts: 5 Location: neptune
|
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
U2 is good idea . many options of upgrade . example dual 400 and 2gb ram |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sugarat Guru
Joined: 24 Jul 2002 Posts: 348
|
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For performance, I would agree that an Ultra2 has more long-term prospects. one possible advantage of an Ultra 5 however, is that it has an IDE bus.
I havean Ultra 5, and I most certainly view this as an advantage as I've just stuck in a nice quiet and fast 80Gb Barracuda. - It goes like a dream now. _________________ --[ UltraSPARC ]--
Accept no imitations |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Chewy2k n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2004 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for that, looks like I'll be picking up an Ultra 2. Cheaper, as well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ciaranm Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Jul 2003 Posts: 1719 Location: In Hiding
|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
The u5's IDE bus is most definitely not an advantage. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
labrador Guru
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 316
|
Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 5:24 pm Post subject: What point does the Ultra series get to be better than U2? |
|
|
I've looked at the used market and wondered the same thing.
The Ultra 2 seems to be the last machine type that is SCSI based,
and yet I know my Ultra 1 is sluggish for disk I/O.
If an Ultra 5 is bad, then is an Ultra 10, 20 or 60 a better upgrade? Assuming one wants about 2 to 4 times better performance, what makes a good upgrade from an Ultra 1? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rsborn Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 10 Feb 2004 Posts: 105 Location: Webster, NY
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:48 pm Post subject: Ultra 10 |
|
|
I currently have an Ultra 10 and it is also an IDE based SPARC. Performance is pretty good for a machine this old. It's especially fast compared with the solaris 8 that was loaded on it previously. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Weeve Retired Dev
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 Posts: 641
|
Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
On the workstation side of the house, the Ultra 30, 60 and 80 have SCSI as well at higher speeds than the Ultra 2.
There are also the Blade 1x00 and 2x00 workstations with fibre-channel SCSI but those are big bucks and the 1500 and 2500 may or may not work under Linux. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
snowsquirrel n00b
Joined: 02 Jul 2002 Posts: 41 Location: Lunenburg, NS, Canada
|
Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2004 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
The SBUS used on the Ultra 2's is slow. The PCI bus used on new Sun's is much faster. The U5 is upgradeable to 440, while the U2 is upgradeable to 396.
We have a few of the Dual U2 396's at work, and they are a nice machine.
But as a desktop unit, I think you will find the 2x200 pretty slow. The U5 will likely be faster as a desktop.
In a multiuser/server environment the U2's smp and scsi may make it a better choice. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
labrador Guru
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 316
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:18 am Post subject: ultra 60 looks like nice price point |
|
|
I see some Ultra 60s on sale on eBay for about $160 Cdn and
just a few hours to go. I'm wondering if the PCI slot on these is
compatible with those from x86, and if so, could one put
a IDE controller in there and add tons o' storage for cheap? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
snowsquirrel n00b
Joined: 02 Jul 2002 Posts: 41 Location: Lunenburg, NS, Canada
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know this, but I suspect that any PCI card that works with an U10/U5 will work with an Ultra 60. As I think the openBoot is the main issue with most PCI cards. OpenBoot is common across all suns, though there are different versions.
The processor on the Ultra 60s is a full blown sparc II, while the CPU on the ultra 10's is scaled back a bit, (IIi I think).
Thought this likely won't make a difference for desktop use.
~S |
|
Back to top |
|
|
labrador Guru
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 316
|
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:04 pm Post subject: Can handle boot from SCSI |
|
|
I can live with booting from SCSI, and that could be where /boot
and some other file systems live. I'd want other partitions placed on
larger cheaper IDE drives. The disk I/O intensive parts of portage, for
example, would probably run quicker on IDE than on the old narrow
SCSI. But then that would require an external bay
of some sort.
I like the Sun machines, but disk I/O on narrow
SCSI and limited disk capacities are a bottle neck compared
with similarly cheap used x86 machines. I'm currently running
an Ultra 1 with 4.3 and 9.1 GB drives. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
labrador Guru
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 316
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:30 pm Post subject: I take that back |
|
|
I've picked up an Ultra 60 for $105 USD. The eBayer offering a second chance to those who don't win is a great discovery (anysystem.com). If you don't play leap frog with another bidder, driving up the price, you get a much better deal. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|