Well then Cisco should be stating that these are x86 world records and not *server* world records compared against *all* servers as is implied. And as for your comparison, probably better/more fair to compare rack server to rack server than blade to rack. Of course there will be differences but you don't take into account the blade chassis rack space, power and noise thats generated from the required blade chassis.

So why not compare Cisco's closest comparable rack system like the C240 M3? Whats interesting here is that the SPARC T5-2, while only 1RU larger, supports 33% higher RAM capacity, supports 3 more PCI Gen3 express slots, 2 more 10Gig Ethernet ports (vs only Gig E on theC240) and draws 400W less Power at maximum configuration. And without C240 benchmarks available with E5-2600 v2, we have to assume its similar or slower than the B200 M3 so the SPARC T5-2 is still ~20% faster.And finally, SPARC T5-2 will significantly outperform any E5-2600 v2 based system on database or any heavy I/O bandwidth workloads, considering that the SPARC T5-2 is showing an 81% advantage in STREAM benchmark compared to Oracles own E5-2600 v2 based X4-2L. I guess we'll have to wait till Cisco publishes a TPC-C or TPC-H result to compare to SPARC T5...