HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Itanium or PA-RISC

Go to solution
Brian Bergstrand
Honored Contributor

Itanium or PA-RISC


We are ordering a new server (already have the budget) and I would like to know everyone's expierence with the Itanium line.

The server's primary use will be running Oracle 9i, with 10-20 production databases (nothing really big, I think a couple of GB is the max).

My predecessor had recommended a 4 way rx9610. I'm leaning towards a 4 way rp7410, especially since I don't see the rx9610 on HP's web site anymore.

Itanium is the future according to HP, but I think it still needs to prove its metal.

What does everyone think? Does anyone run production Itanium boxes with Oracle?

Alexander M. Ermes
Honored Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC

Hi there.
We run approx. 35 - 40 databases on PA_RISC .
Fast enough , reliable, reasonable performance.

Itanium is not bound to HP-UX.
You can also run MS software ( Server ) on it, HP-UX or even ( and not the worst ) LINUX.

So i hope, that our next servers will be equipped with Itanium cpu's.
Alexander M. Ermes
.. and all these memories are going to vanish like tears in the rain! final words from Rutger Hauer in "Blade Runner"
doug mielke
Respected Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC

We recently did what we're calling a 'last buy' of RISC.

I know the sales rep tells us HP/UX on Itanium is mature, and if anyone will make the port solid, it would be HP. It still seems a bit risky in these time of lean internal support staffs.

Also of concern is the rush to market philosophy that Intel has recently been forced to adopt due to the stiff competiton from AMD.
When the AMD released the gig. procesor, Intel dumped their entire well organized roadmap and rushed to catch up. The race was not without pain.

Intel will say that this segment of the market was not effected by the low end proc. races, and indeed, their Xeon processors seemed to hold onto some stability. The 1st Itanium was a bit less solid. For us, the FUD factor is here for a while when we talk about Intel.

We've decided that the advantages of going to Itanium don't outweigh the risc of being on the bleeding edge of this latest Intel attempt at this new processor. We'll be on Risc for the next few years.

Mike Fisher_5
Trusted Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC


I can't help with Oracle, but regarding your comment about Itanium not having proved it's mettle yet

Gerry Tully posted this in July:

I posted this also in July & got some interesting replies:

I hope that these links are food for thought

If you can't be good, be careful
Don't get mad - get naked
Brian Bergstrand
Honored Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC

Thanks guys. Mike those pointers really helped. I think I'm going for the rp7410.
James Anker
Valued Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC

Hi Brian,

My job is a pre sales Consultant and I face this question every other day.

If it 9i RAC your deploying on Linux then IA64 is not a bad bet, lower cost than PA RISC and Oracle now development on Red Hat Advanced Server before they port to HP UX, Solaris etc.

If you are to take an apples for apples scenario of PA RISC v's IA64 when running HP UX the decision becomes a little simpler.

The Apps/DB you will be deploying are probably certified for HP UX11i for example - but what version of 11i??? _ If you are looking at Itanium it could be 11i 1.6 or 2.0 or 3.0 or perhaps version 4 of 11i! Truth is there will be 3 x versions of 11i on Itanium before 11i becomes the same as the 11i that runs on PA RISC - so if you don't mind changing OS version every six to twelve months then why not.. Then ask if your application providers or Oracle if they support UX 11i version 1.6 or v2.0 - they will probably say "version what?"

The performance differences are here:


hp server rx5670 (900 MHz) L 1 18,200
hp server rx5670 (900 MHz) L 2 34,500
hp server rx5670 (900 MHz) L 4 65,300
hp server rx5670 (1GHz) L 1 19,000
hp server rx5670 (1GHz) L 2 36,000
hp server rx5670 (1GHz) L 4 78,455 MSSQL 68,000


hp server rp5470 (750MHz) L 1 14,200
hp server rp5470 (750MHz) L 2 27,500
hp server rp5470 (750MHz) L 4 50,000
hp server rp5470 (875MHz) L 1 15,506
hp server rp5470 (875MHz) L 2 30,030
hp server rp5470 (875MHz) L 4 54,600

1.3GHz & 1.5GHz IA64 results will be out soon and look good.

The 9610 by the way is dead and has been for a while - this was part of the Itanium 1 strategy - trade ins are available...

If it where my choice I would go for the RP5470 with 750MHz PA RISC (avoid the 875's they cost a fortune and aren't actually much faster than the 750') and upgrade to IA64 when they release the version 3 of HP UX 11i - this will be the true combined version of HP UX for PA RISC and Itanium.

All the PA RISC Servers (with the exception of the RP24XX range) can be upgraded to IA64 in the future so you should get the best of both worlds going this route.

Any questions you can mail me.


Honored Contributor

Re: Itanium or PA-RISC

Since HP will finally out of the CPU making business (the last I've heard will be the Mako Chip PA8800 -- toppping out at 1Ghz) - I believe going with PARISC platforms as a 'last-buy' strategy will play well while all of us wait for the HPUX maturity on the Itanic err Itanium...

HP did a good job teaching Intel CPU making with the latest incarnation of the Itanium (Madison...). Since HP is betting the future as an Itanic one, then so it is. I do hope though that the promise of in-box upgrades to the PA 87xx on existing rp74xx, rp8400 and SuperDome will eventually happen as well as migration (or emulation) of PARISC binaries to the Itanium environment. And Tru64 features be blended very well with HPUX...

Meanwhile - early adopters of the Integrity line might want to take a serious look at Windows 2003 or Linux..

Hakuna Matata.