SUMMARY: solaris x86

From: Antonia Gomez (
Date: Tue Jun 30 1998 - 09:00:30 CDT

Thanks at:

  Williamson Jason, Eric D. Pancer , Mark Belanger, Jim Harmon, Matt
Reynolds , Claude Charest,
   ian , Martin Huber , Shriman Gurung and Terje J. Hanssen

Some answers :

>I have used Solaris x86 for close to two years (2.5, 2.51, and 2.6) and

>have found it to be quite stable as long as you shut down the system
>properly (much like the Sparc version!) It performs great (on less
>expensive hardware), but is rather finicky about the platform (look on
>Sun's support site, for an HCL). Hope this helps : )
> "Williamson, Jason"

>Actually, OpenBSD and Linux are much better on X86. There have been
>bad results with Solaris on X86. It is VERY inefficient.
> Eric

>I can't comment on Solaris x86. I've heard that
>it's hardware compatiblility is a bit limited.
>You'll never beat linux for cost/perfomance
>and the number of apps available.
>It supports a vast number of video and network
>cards. The RedHat distribution is quite easy to
>install and configure. It comes out of the box
>with Netscape, emacs, and the apache web server
>along with almost every unix app you've ever seen.
>I've been using it at home for over a year and
>as a desktop at work in a heterogenous unix
>environment. It works great - very stable.

>I think so - I have severl x86 servers. My Pentium 200 Intel
>away a Ultra 1/170. The Ultra 1/170 probably has better I/O
>capability, but computationally, the Intel is better.
>Any Intel Platform ? - No - be sure to follow the Hardware
>List (HCL) for the particular realease you want to use. This list is
>available for free on the Sun web pages.
>Matt Reynolds

>It is stable and quick. Have a look on for the latest
hardware compatability list (HCL). >This lists the platforms X86 has
been tested on.
> ian <>

>It is stable, I saw no difference to sparc.
>The performance is difficult to compare, it is mainly depenendt on the
>hardware. I/O intensive applications run on a sparc machine --very
>faster, while a computing intensive application (say a short program
>loop, running in the processor cache with little I/O), is on a 200 Mhz
>pentium fater than on a 200 Mhz Ultrasparc.
>Look into the x86 Hardware Compatibility List available from Sun.
>It ran on all mainboards between 486 and Pentium II where I tried to
>install it.
> --martin

>It's pretty good, assuming that you can get it to run in the first
>place. It'll run on most Intel based PCs but you may have trouble
>getting supportif you use anything not on Sun's Hardware Compatibility
>List ( is a good place to start). Forget about
>using it on a laptop; it' possible, but sun only support a
>microscopicslly-small range of machines and peripherals.
>Performance is acceptable for small servers and workstations, though
>obvoiusly not in the Sparc class.
>shriman gurung

>Regarding performance, look at Sun's press release of 6/29/98:
>Terje J. Hanssen


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:12:42 CDT