On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 10:22:35AM +0000, Bruce O'Neel wrote:
> 
> I have one existing sparc system (ss4, 110mhz) that compared to the other systems 
> (say a 200mhz 604e) is quite underwhelming.  Are the Supersparcs and hypersparcs
> likely to be as slow as the microsparc IIs?  And how does the Ultra 2 compare 
> to the Supersparcs and hypersparcs?
>

Look down the page here:

< http://www.macopinion.com/columns/macskeptic/99/09/09/>

There is a table of specint95 measurements that can give you a bit of
a guide.  According to here:

<http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/Systems/U2/spec.html>

(use sunsolve, it has lots of interesting stuff on it even if Sun have
locked away some of the details now :)

The 200Mhz would be a Ultrasparc-1 processor, if you can get your
hands on a 300Mhz beastie it would be better because that would be an
Ultrasparc-II processor.

Hypersparc is good but a Ultrasparc would be better - not surprising
since the Ultrasparc was the next generation chip.

-- 
Brett Lymn