Re: Which Sparc is best?

[Craig Morehouse <craigm@gdi.net>]

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 22:54:48 -0400, Ben Collins wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 06:46:56PM -0400, Craig Morehouse wrote:
>> I'm new to Debian, but am going to be buying 30 workstations for a new
>> operation, and I'd like to use Sun hardware running 3.0 Woody.
>> 
>> Question, which Sun box has proven to be REALLY good and solid with
>> Debian? Are the Ultra 2's better than Ultra 5's or 10's, or vice versa?
>> Should I build a bunch os SS20's with 4 cpus, or should I get the
>> latest Blade?
> 
> For the most tested and stable machines, go with an UltraSPARC. I'd
> suggest one of two types of systems.
> 
> 1) The early IDE line. E.g. Ultra 5 or 10. The reason being that the
> machines are cheap to maintain and offer decent performance.
> 
> 2) PCI SCSI based systems. E.g. Ultra 2, 30, 60. If you're interested in
> SMP based systems, the 2 and 60 are the way to go. Debian's primary
> archive (aka ftp-master, aka auric) is an Ultra60 with dual 450mhz
> cpu's, 1.5 gigs of ram and a ~240gig raid5 
> 
> You could go all out and get some Blade's. These are still fairly new,
> but are well supported from what I've heard. Some of them still have
> quirks with ethernet, I believe (Linux issue, not hardware).
 
	Thanks, Ben.

	We had some early Blades last year, and I really thought that a dual CPU
Ultra2 was a better box.

	Does Debian install nicely on the Ultra 5's and 10's? As you said, there are plenty
of 10's around at nice prices.

	Another question... Are there any Package disadvantages in using a Sparc
over an Intel box using Debian? Is the same range of Debian software available
for all CPU's?

	Thanks,
	Craig



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org