« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: A trip to my dad's office.  (Read 1049 times)

RussianVodka

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 689
    • View Profile
A trip to my dad's office.
« on: July 10, 2005, 04:57:58 am »
I was planing to instal Linux on one of my computers, but I didn\'t have the space (1 75Gb HD) and didn\'t want to risk partitioning.

So my dad (who works as a scientist for a national lab, but hired by Yale) mentioned to me that he had a 10 year old computer in his office (10 years ago they only had three of these in the entire department) which had a 16Gb HD in it.

On the ride there I inquired about the system. Turns out it has 4 200Mhz processors, 256Mb, some old sound card, and a 3dfx Voodoo3 (graphics card instaled in 2000).

(Also, the computer he is curently using is a dual core P4 with a 1600*1280 default resolution display, all provided by the government, but that\'s not the point.)

Back to the 10 year old monster. For it\'s time that thing was state of the art, and now I want to take it apart for scrap... Yeah... Horrible inconsiderate me... But what ever.

At first I wanted to take the entire thing and set up a server in the basement. But then I figured that even with 4 processors it would be too slow. Plus my dad was oposed it.

So, we get the case out and take of the covers. The thing had what looked like a AT motherboard inside (or maby it was ATX, 1996 seems a bit too late for AT), but either way it was larger than average. To the motherboard which was possitioned as usual, were atached these two things that I first mistook for RAM chips (I\'ve seen 1980\'s 4Mb RAM chips, and they were hudge). Then after closer examination I noticed that those were actualy were actualy the boards to which the processors were attached (two processors per board). And one of those boards had 8 RAM slots, 4 of which were filled up (64Mb RAM chips?).

I begin to get the craving to have this system... Now I know it will run like crap, but I just MUST have it! It just looks so freaking cool!

Once we took out the needed hardware (the HD and GPU which I needed to plug in my monitor, my curent one is being repaired), I get an idea on what to do with the rest of the system, I could take out the MoBo and the boards that hold the processors, put them in picture frames and hang them up on my wall. I mean realy, how many people do you know that have quadruple processor MoBo\'s hanging up on their walls. But sadly my dad was oposed the idea.

So... Tommorow I\'m going to try to get the computer again... Any idea on what I should do with it?


Note: This post was not proof-read.
Logged



Q: How many Planeshifters does it take to expalin a simple concept to a newb?
A: Six. Five to argue on who\'s explanation is right, and Moogie to lock the thread.

Shadowfalcon

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2005, 07:14:38 am »
Dude, that is quite a find. But don\'t think for a second that it will be a slow maching. If you can get an OS that supports multiple CPU\'s that thing would handle quite nicely. Windows 2000 server supports up to four processors, and Datacenter Server supports eight. As to what you could use it for? I dunno, it would be great at multi-tasking, you could stream multiple movies over the net. But not too many people have a need to do that. Or you could have 3 dedicated Quake II servers running. But not too many people play Quake II these days. You\'re right too, it would look neat hanging on a wall. I wish I had that system...
Logged

Seytra

  • Forum Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 2052
  • No system can compensate lack of common sense.
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2005, 07:54:14 am »
First: Windoze? You must be joking! It would be a shame to use Windoze on that system! Linux is by far more appropriate, and it handles multiprocessor boards just fine. Windoze Expensive Edition may be able to handle whooping 8 processors, Linux can handle at least 32 or even 64, I don\'t know, for free.

Second: for most people, it won\'t make a difference if you have that baby hanging in your room or if it\'s just your old 8 bit soundblaster.

Also, it will be far from slow. I am perfectly sure that, given SMP Linux, it will be able to do quite well as webserver and probably also as fileserver. I am using an old dual P90 as fileserver, which suffices for my needs.

Note that you\'ll only notice the extra 3 processors when running several processor intensive processes, a single process won\'t be split up because it\'s not compiled that way.

If you destroy it, I will hate you for all eternity, by the way...
« Last Edit: July 10, 2005, 07:58:35 am by Seytra »
Logged

Efflixi Aduro

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1871
  • O_o
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2005, 08:33:39 am »
Maybe if you restore that you could sell it to some sort of collector? ?(
Logged
Lol Internet

Uyaem

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2005, 09:31:23 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Seytra
First: Windoze? You must be joking! It would be a shame to use Windoze on that system! Linux is by far more appropriate, and it handles multiprocessor boards just fine. Windoze Expensive Edition may be able to handle whooping 8 processors, Linux can handle at least 32 or even 64, I don\'t know, for free.


This is probably the weirdest argumentation I ever heard. ;)
Linux is more appropriate for a 4-processor-system because it can handle up to (perhaps) 32 or 64 processors... (Yes, it\'s free, but so is emule or bittorrent + windows ;). No legality discussions, perhaps they even have an extra license for spare where the computer comes from).
And it also handles 32 processors, it\'s just a matter of the license.
Telling just anyone \"use Linux because it\'s free and so much better\" is, no offence, bad advice. If you want to play with a multiprocessor system, in order to optimize its performance, and you don\'t know much about how Linux works - use Windows. Even if you do something for the first time, there\'s self-explanatory GUIs for pretty much everything, not just some .conf file with lots of vars whose \"nms r shrtned byond rcgnition\".

Performance on a multi-processor-machine is all about the right configuration. Doubling the number of processors won\'t give you twice the processing speed. There is no way to get \"top performance\", the way you optimize depends on what the computer should do. Lots of tweaking, lots of fun ;)

Quote
If you destroy it, I will hate you for all eternity, by the way...

Me too. :)


Greets,
Pogopuschel

PS: This posting was written using 90% Linux, 2% sarcasm, and 8% humour.
Logged
The internet is "the terrorists'" most important weapon, they say.
Wrong.
Fear is their most important weapon.
Ours is our freedom.

Shadowfalcon

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2005, 04:13:56 pm »
Thanks for the defense Pogopuschel!
Logged

Uyaem

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 747
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2005, 08:16:13 pm »
Defense? Well.. not sure about that, I just stated my opinion. :)
I really got to love Linux myself, but I don\'t agree that it is necessarily better than Windows. It depends on the user\'s needs, wishes, and knowledge.
Logged
The internet is "the terrorists'" most important weapon, they say.
Wrong.
Fear is their most important weapon.
Ours is our freedom.

Platyna

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2005, 08:21:05 pm »
Slackware with ice WM or Enlightement will run just great on it. :D Depends what graphic card is that. ;)


Regards.
Logged
Zuzanna K. Filutowska
RPG Players Community || Platyna\'s Planeshift Warehouse
\"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.\" -- Edward Burke

Shadowfalcon

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2005, 10:29:51 pm »
I really didn\'t mean to start yet another windows vs linux war. I know the ups and downs of both OS\'s, I recomended 2000 Server because, as a gamer, windows is the OS I know how to use best, and I happen to have a legal copy of it.

Edit: Not to say that linux can\'t play games of course... *CoughPlaneShiftCough*!
« Last Edit: July 10, 2005, 10:33:58 pm by Shadowfalcon »
Logged

Platyna

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2005, 10:34:35 pm »
2000 Server at 200 Mhz CPU? Good luck!


Regards.
Logged
Zuzanna K. Filutowska
RPG Players Community || Platyna\'s Planeshift Warehouse
\"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.\" -- Edward Burke

Shadowfalcon

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2005, 10:36:47 pm »
He won\'t need luck. I ran 2000 Pro on a single PII 266 machine, and that was fine for me \'till I got Far Cry.
Logged

Platyna

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2005, 10:56:49 pm »
But he said on the first post he wants install Linux.


Regards.
Logged
Zuzanna K. Filutowska
RPG Players Community || Platyna\'s Planeshift Warehouse
\"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.\" -- Edward Burke

Shadowfalcon

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2005, 11:06:36 pm »
You\'re right, I guess I didn\'t but 2 and 2 together. Go with linux!
Logged

Seytra

  • Forum Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 2052
  • No system can compensate lack of common sense.
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2005, 11:21:49 pm »
Alright, so let me clear this up:
I was suggesting Linux because this sort of system is best used as a server, in one way or another. For desktop use, it is far less likely to be of advantage, because you usually only have one really processing intensive task there, and these tend to require a lot more processing power than this system can give you on one processor. Since these tasks seldomly are designed for multiporcessor systems, the other three processors would therefore be idling 99% of the time, maybe serving the occasional mouse interrupt.

And for server use it is my opinion that Linux is superior to windows, starting with the lack of mandatory GUI, trustworthy security (both in terms of acknowledging / fixing flaws and non-trojanness of the system). Granted, the learning curve can severely shift the balance, especially since you need to compile an SMP enabled kernel to make use of more than one processor. Still, think of the poor computer that you would be torturing with Windoze! Let\'s just say that I do not trust anything of importance to a Windoze system, and that I would not contract a hosting / IT company that is using Windoze servers.

@ Pogopuschel: I agree that the argument is a bit weird. I was assuming that RussianVodka did not have a copy of Windoze Expensive Edition and wasn\'t in the mood of shelling out several hundreds of $ just like that just to have it handle >2 processors. Even an illegal copy would AFAICS be hard to come by. Thus, the options were 1) Windoze desktop or 2) Linux / BSD. Also, I was trying to exemplify the IMNSHO unjustified and completely artificial restrictions of Windows, which I am strongly opposed to. IMO, the desktop version of Windoze must support at least two processors, and the server version must support at least 32, at the price the most basic ones of these versions are.

Anyway, Windows IMO is for games, and that system can\'t run modern games, so it\'s a server, which means Linux. :D
« Last Edit: July 10, 2005, 11:26:01 pm by Seytra »
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »