Sun's New Workstations and Graphics Cards 299
An anonymous reader "Sun Microsystems has released the Sun Blade 2000 workstation, along with a new graphics accelerator, the XVR-1000. This could very well give SGI's lineup a run for its money in the CAD and Visualization fields, although its fillrate and 38-bit colour may make it less desirable for animation. Make sure to check out Ace's article. " (page down
a couple times to read it)
C|Net Article From Yesterday (Score:3, Informative)
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-860701.html [com.com]
here is the press release from sun (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.sun.com/2002-0314/feature/ [sun.com]
The system ships with a 73gb fibrechannel harddisc, 900 or 1.05 UltraSparcIII (dual capable), and a gig of ram. nice box. It sets a world record in workstation performance (halfway down the press-release).
Direct link (Score:4, Informative)
Sunblade line is very poor (Score:2, Informative)
If it wasn't for endianness compatibility with existing binary data, I wouldn't be using it.
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sunblade line is very poor (Score:3, Informative)
lame comments in the post (Score:3, Informative)
That is just wrong. This has 10 bits per component RGB. Typically that's more than enough. In addition animation apps like Maya tend to be geometry and state limited not fill limited.
Ofcourse the tag 'animation' is a bit to vague to mean anything in the first place.
Well done Sun, this should cause SGI some pain, but I'd say more because it gives the impression that Sun is doing something interesting where SGI hasn't done anything genuinely interesting in a LONG time.
Re:38 - bit color (Score:3, Informative)
It's not about the number of colors, or whether you can see the difference. You want more bits of color precision for handling multiple lighting/shading/blending/etc. ops that happen throughout the rendering pipe, before the end result's precision is scaled down and displayed.
For example, when adding more and more lights to a scene, you will eventually start clipping against those 24 bits of precision.
I'd like to see 128 bpp internal rendering pipes and 128 bit Z buffers. It would take a lot to exhaust that kind of precision.
Re:The Blade x000 is NOT a terminal (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Sunblade line is very poor (Score:4, Informative)
See:
http://www.sun.com/desktop/sunblade2000/d
for more details.
Summary:
Sunblade 100:
USIIe chip, runs at 500mhz., up to 2 gig ram, 2x 20g HD.
Blade 1000:
1 or 2x USIII chip, runs at 750MHz or 900MHz. Up to 8 gig ram, and either 36 or 73 gig disks (1 or 2)
Blade 2000:
1 or 2x USIII chips, runs at 900MHz, or 1.05 GHz. Up to 8 gig ram, and 2x 73 gig FC-AL disks (fiber connected disks)
And that graphics card kicks butt. You can put up to two of them in a blade 1000 or 2000, letting you drive 4 displays.
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:4, Informative)
rendering color != display color (Score:2, Informative)
>> make it less desirable for animation
I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. The fillrate is just fine for a workstation, games generally are the only programs that need a high fillrate, memory bandwidth and size, and of course T&L are *much* more important. The 38 bit internal color is excellent, nicely comparing to SGI ( http://www.sgi.com/workstations/comparison.html ), and unmatched by 3dlabs. The bit-depth of the graphics card has nothing to do with the color rendering accuracy, which is usually 48 or 64 bits for high end stuff. Games really need high bit depth precision for multitexturing, which multiplies color errors. I think Carmack mentioned this in a
Nvidia will probably have 64 bit color in NV30, and 3dfx's rampage was supposed to have 52 bit color ( http://www.digit-life.com/articles/3dfxtribute/ ) Games start needing high bit depths when you have massive multi-texturing, which tends to multiply errors. I think Carmack had a
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:4, Informative)
As for raw compute performance, if you believe Sun's SPEC ratings from their product site, a 1.05GHz SPARC CPU is only just lagging behind an Intel 2.2GHz PIV on integer performance and beating it on FP. As FP is what drive 90% of scientific applications, Intel hasn't got the SPARC beaten yet by a long shot (especially since you can get a 106-way SPARC box, but Intel is limited to 32-way last I heard).
It's probably also worth noting that list price is rarely what a company will end up paying.
Matrox's nextgen board? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Full Coverage! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:2, Informative)
I also do chip design and we have been using Xeon with Linux for many applications. For cell level hspice and block level synthesis you can't beat the speed of the PCs.
For top level jobs like extraction we need the ram.
38-bit color is bad (Score:3, Informative)
Does 10 or 12 bits really make a difference over 8 bits? Of course it does. Most film work these days is rendered in either 12 bits, 10 bits logarithmic, or 16 bits. Think about it: in a dark movie theatre room, 256 levels of grey (for instance) is not a lot. And if that doesn't convince you, think about image manipulation: after a few multiplications and compositions, you'll end up with very little color resolution with 8 bits. And yes, these things are often done in hardware in the color buffer (eg flame [discreet.com]).
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:5, Informative)
As for PCs, NOBODY's doing large model work on them. Small shops might use them because they're economical, but no one would use a PC to work with multi-thousand surface/100k+ element geometry/FEM. Perhaps this is a Windows limitation, not hardware architecture; it's hard to tell because most of the big 4 (Catia/ProE/Unigraphics/Ideas) don't have a Linux port yet, AFAIK.
Re:Sun's in trouble (Score:5, Informative)
You find me an Intel machine with those specs. Oh, and it must be fully managable from a remote site down to the hardware level; you have to be able to turn CPUs on and off, power the machine up and down, re-assign drive IDs, and such -- remotely.
The eight-way xSeries competes more with Sun's low-end server hardware, which is comprable in price; I can't really give an exact figure without knowing what this server is for.
Re:38 - bit color (Score:2, Informative)
it is difficult to get screen colors to match printed colors. they simply use different color space. (although you can simulate cmyk with rgb somewhat). and differences are easier to see in print. in 24 bit color there are 16M colors, but only 8 bits (256) of variation for each of the 3 primaries. this also one of the reasons that many scanners and printers are capable of more than 24 bit color.
Then there's the alpha (transparency) that isn't considered at all in 24 bit RGB. so that matters, too.
Re:Except that.. (Score:1, Informative)
No innovative products? check their products webpage, they have stuff no one else can even close!
Ace is wrong... (Score:3, Informative)
Currently, the XVR-1000 targets primarily the engineering and CAD markets, as opposed to 3D animation, given the rather limited fillrate. However, Sun intends to use the MAJC-5200 to scale the performance of its graphics solutions to higher levels in the future (as seen in this older roadmap), so we may yet see a solution attacking the 3D animation market at some point in the future.
The MAJC-5200 will improve geometry performance (number of triangles, floating point math required), not fillrate (number of pixels/texels shaded, integer math).
Animation requires better fillrate, and more MAJC-5200s won't provide that. MAJC-5200 *will* provide Sun with stronger geometry performance (FLOPS, remember?), which is just what Sun's core engineering and CAD markets most want. Lots of small triangles to accurately show the precise shape of things of digitally-created parts. Nothing about MAJC-5200 will strengthen Sun's penetration into new SGI markets per se. That'd be dependent on some other, presumably fill-rate enhancing, technology.
--LP
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:3, Informative)
When you've got some serious number crunching to do, a PC is lame.
That was true up to the late 1990's. Today, it is not. A P4 blows away a SunBlade 1000 for both integer and floating point number crunching. In fact, go check the SPEC results. P4 is faster than any Sun workstation. If you want to beat a P4, you need to be talking to IBM, not Sun.
Re:What are these still used for? (Score:1, Informative)