[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference ricks::dechips

Title:Hudson VLSI
Notice:For Digital Chip Data - CHIPBZ::PRODUCTION$:[DS_INFO...]
Moderator:RICKS::PHIPPS
Created:Wed Feb 12 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:701
Total number of notes:4658

656.0. "PYXIS Advice Requested" by SCASS1::MARIA (John Maria) Sat Mar 08 1997 14:50

    I have a large customer who's OCR application has stressed the limits
    of our fastest Alpha offerings since 1993.  Their latest project calls
    for a system that can scan three 12" X 12" objects, at 200 dpi, per
    second.  Their benchmarks proved a 400-500Mhz AlphaStation 500 w/2MB
    cache, and a dual processor AlphaServer 4000 5/300 w/2MB cache were
    able to meet or beat the minimum (333ms per object) times.  As a side
    bar dual Pentium Pro 200 w/512KB did not make the cut!
    
    The systems run NT V4, and "the customers" parent companies OCR code,
    coupled with the parent companies PCI Scanner card, based on a PLX
    PCI9060-2 chip set.  Due to the fact that my customer is bidding to win
    this project, they asked us for a lower cost system.
    
    I was able to procure a DPW500a (Miata for those who don't know)!  The
    machine is equiped with the same amount of memory, as the Alpha systems
    that worked.  The DPW500a beat a simulated benchmark of the scanning
    application, using images (>6MB each) stored on the disk.  When another
    system was accually used at the parent company, using the PCI Scanning
    card, the system failed to work.   It not only failed the real life
    benchmark, it seemed to have driver problems. They are still able to
    run well on the AlphaServer 4000, and unfortunatly for me, are about to
    try a clone, using the Alcore chip set. 
    
    The parent company is  very secretive with the card, and the driver code.  
    
    I am aware of a couple major differences with the DPWa.  It uses the
    Pyxis chip, and the memory "width" is 128 bits wide.
    
    Are there any known problems with the PLX PCI9060-2 working with a
    Pyxis based system?
    
    What is the chip set used on the AlphaStation 4000?
    
    Best Regards,
    John
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
656.1all chips have bugsWRKSYS::HOUSEKenny House, Workstations EngineeringSun Mar 09 1997 12:2116
    re .0 - "Are there any known problems with the PLX PCI9060-2 working
    with a Pyxis based system?"
    
    A quick look through the PCI mailing list archives shows that there are
    at least 15 errata with the PCI9060-2 part, some of which affect data
    reliability and performance.  Specific details weren't available there,
    so I'm off to their web site ( http://www.plxtech.com/ ) to see what I
    can find.  The -3 part was announced over a year ago, claiming to fix
    lots of -2 problems in an allegedly pin- and program-compatible part.
    
    Pyxis has its own problems, with simple workarounds, and I'm working
    with John offline to see whether this card exposes any of them.  A
    slightly different spin on this customer's issue is being discussed in
    WRKSYS::XL_PERSONAL_WORKSTATION note 289.
    
    -- Kenny House
656.2sSCASS1::MARIAJohn MariaSun Mar 09 1997 23:269
    The vendo building the custom card has told my customer the design is
    frozen.  It seems silly that they would not at least try the -3 if it
    is pin, and signal compatible.
    
    I will ask the customer to pursue having the -2 replaced with a -3,
    even if only for an experiment!
    
    Thanks for working weekends!
    John
656.3Just for completeness...DECWET::LIVINGSTONJames W. Livingston, Jr.Tue Mar 11 1997 17:059
it's worth noting that the Alcor chipset supports a memory path that's
256 bits wide, which could account for some better I/O performance, at 
the same processor speeds.  The greater bus width is what makes the
Alcor/Maverick/Brett cost more, to some degree.  Mind you, the Alcor
chipset has its own problems.

Cheers,
James
656.4Pyxis is MUCH FASTER than AlcorWRKSYS::SCHUMANNTue Mar 11 1997 19:3522
re .3

Although the Alcor memory path is 256 bits wide vs 128 for Pyxis, Pyxis is
uniformly faster on all memory accesses. The measured McCalpin bandwidth for
Alcor/Bret is about 170 Mbytes/sec vs 292 Mbytes/sec for Pyxis (232 Mbytes/sec
with 2MB cache). The measured memory latency (including the wasted cache miss)
for Miata/Pyxis is 130ns vs 330ns for Bret.

see also
   http://src-www.pa.dec.com/SRC/personal/berc/miata/index.htm
and 
   http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/

The only performance metric where Alcor performance will exceed Pyxis
performance is on DMA read bandwidth for long (>64 byte) accesses. That's
because Alcor supports DMA read prefetch and Pyxis does not. The  
max sustained DMA read bandwidth on Pyxis is estimated at 160 Mbytes/sec,
whereas Alcor can presumably do over 200 Mbyte/sec. This performance
difference impacts very few real-world applications.

It's bad enough that Aspen is spreading anti-Pyxis FUD. I would hope that
our own employees would refrain.
656.5Where can I get info?SWAM1::POIANI_MISat Mar 29 1997 15:277
    I've seen data stating the Pyxis can actually do 1.3GB per second
    sustained memory bandwidth, probabally without cache. What's the
    bottleneck.
    
    Is there any white papers or tech docs on Pyxis?
    
    MP
656.6peak vs sustainedWRKSYS::SCHUMANNSat Mar 29 1997 18:5413
There's STREAMS benchmark data at 

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/

The cacheless Personal Workstation 433a does 292.6 Mbytes/sec on COPY, which is
competitive with other vendors' high-end workstations. Pyxis is actually capable of
slightly faster COPY performance, if using CPU frequencies 466, 533, 600, etc.,
which permit the memory bus to run at exactly 66 MHz, rather than the 61 MHz
clock rate used on the 433a.

The "peak" bandwidth of the Pyxis memory bus is about 1Gbyte/sec.

--RS