TPM cluster scores are meanless
The TPC-C benchmark scales perfectly across clusters. A score of 30M tpm mean that poor old Oracle couldn't find enough money to build a cluster than would score 60M tpm or 600M tpm. M$ always used to be the top of the table since their marketting budget would fund any one wanting to take the TPC-C crown.
The other issue with TPC-C is that the score must be accompanied by the price. Since Oracle is now a HW vendor and refuses to let anyone else quote a decent price value for the license for any competing benchmarketing result there is precisely zero value in the score.
The last sensible TPC-C cluster score was when an HP rp8400 16 core box out performed a 16 core cluster.
You'll notice that the HP's newer SuperDome2, which came out after the Oracle acquisition of Sun does not have a quoted TPM score, I wonder why?
TPC-C score also pretty much scale with RAM sizes too, the ancient (in system architecture terms) SuperDome [1] manages 4M with 2TB of RAM, the new box will hold 4TB of memory so before any other improvement is thought about you'd except a score of ~8M tpm. But suddenly there is no pressure to post a result.
Maybe IBM wil get around to posting a newer single image score and Oracle won't be able to beat it with their own tin, at which point they might finally agree to post an HP score. In the mean time they'll continue to behave little little kids.
Please find a new benchmark. This one is broken.