who will be the next king of the hill?

Message boards : Number crunching : who will be the next king of the hill?

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31010 - Posted: 12 Nov 2006, 18:03:09 UTC
Last modified: 12 Nov 2006, 18:06:05 UTC

take a look at this monster:
351446
compare to 341221 (Number 2, soon number 1)

The daily average is almost double of the "Top20" number 2
Looks like Dual socket XEON quad core will be the king of the hill for quit some time ... You obvisouly don't need hypertransport to be fast, that was a nice hype, but confirmed to be untrue. Opteron is again ... I will be surprise if GrandFather 4x4 can make it in the top 20 list.

Core 2 Quad core is the Godfather!

on the other side, look at this 268485, a new prototype from AMD, Jul 2006 ... what can it be? K8L or 65nm K8????
It gets a 0.004167 credit per seconds while the Number 2 gets 0.00760 341221 credit per seconds for each processor core.
To compare the top 8 CPU Opteron gets 0.003367 credit per second per core, making this new "prototype machine" faster than the K8 based core, but way behind Core 2

The Proto

Owner Mats Pxxxxxxx
Created 4 Jul 2006 17:20:25 UTC
Total Credit 155,053.79
Recent average credit 1,366.09
CPU type AuthenticAMD
AMD Engineering Sample <====== HO HO! never saw this one before!
Number of CPUs 4
Operating System Linux
2.6.17-1.2139_FC4smp
Memory 6072.48 MB
Cache 1024 KB
Measured floating point speed 1346.79 million ops/sec <==
Measured integer speed 2297.07 million ops/sec <==
Average upload rate 16.95 KB/sec
Average download rate Unknown
Average turnaround time 1.82 days
Maximum daily WU quota per CPU 100/day

Of course, you should not take into account the 2 scored with arrows, because we all know those a "quick and dirty" estimate for the unit ordering mecanism.

Now, the real question ... what frequency it is running at????

Who?

ID: 31010 · Rating: 1 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
zombie67 [MM]
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Feb 06
Posts: 316
Credit: 6,347,141
RAC: 0
Message 31211 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 1:28:52 UTC - in response to Message 31010.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!
Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA
ID: 31211 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31222 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 6:06:54 UTC - in response to Message 31211.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!


Two XEONs Quad Core ... that's what we all need :)

who?
ID: 31222 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31233 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 6:10:12 UTC - in response to Message 31222.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!


Two XEONs Quad Core ... that's what we all need :)

who?

I forgot to say, and to be sure to be transparent, I did merge it with its secret identity ID it was using before the "launch" it got 300 credits from there.

who?
ID: 31233 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
FluffyChicken
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 05
Posts: 1260
Credit: 369,635
RAC: 0
Message 31241 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 9:01:57 UTC - in response to Message 31233.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!


Two XEONs Quad Core ... that's what we all need :)

who?

I forgot to say, and to be sure to be transparent, I did merge it with its secret identity ID it was using before the "launch" it got 300 credits from there.

who?


What Hz is the Xeon running, defualt 2.66 or at 4 like the other.
Team mauisun.org
ID: 31241 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31255 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 16:01:21 UTC - in response to Message 31241.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!


Two XEONs Quad Core ... that's what we all need :)

who?

I forgot to say, and to be sure to be transparent, I did merge it with its secret identity ID it was using before the "launch" it got 300 credits from there.

who?


What Hz is the Xeon running, defualt 2.66 or at 4 like the other.


At the stock 2.66GHZ, insane, isn't it?

who?
ID: 31255 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
FluffyChicken
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Nov 05
Posts: 1260
Credit: 369,635
RAC: 0
Message 31256 - Posted: 16 Nov 2006, 16:19:53 UTC - in response to Message 31255.  

take a look at this monster:
351446


Wow! It's only been a few days, and it already has a RAC of 1733 (#8) as of this post. AMAZING!


Two XEONs Quad Core ... that's what we all need :)

who?

I forgot to say, and to be sure to be transparent, I did merge it with its secret identity ID it was using before the "launch" it got 300 credits from there.

who?


What Hz is the Xeon running, defualt 2.66 or at 4 like the other.


At the stock 2.66GHZ, insane, isn't it?

who?


Yes.




(how come you've not joined team intel over here like you have at seti ?)

Team mauisun.org
ID: 31256 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31327 - Posted: 17 Nov 2006, 21:21:10 UTC - in response to Message 31256.  
Last modified: 17 Nov 2006, 21:22:11 UTC

one week of running time, and 2,092 RAC :)
vrommmmm
Still running without hypertransport :) hehehehe

who?
ID: 31327 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Mats Petersson

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 05
Posts: 225
Credit: 951,788
RAC: 0
Message 31459 - Posted: 20 Nov 2006, 14:02:25 UTC

And why would hypertransport make any sort of difference to Rosetta? Anyone claiming that would be as clever as saying that a Ferrari is better than a normal car in London City rush-hour traffic - it won't, because there's no room to benefit from the speed. As we've discussed before, a good machine (with large enough caches) will have 97%+ cache-hit-rate with Rosetta... You are the one who said you wanted to see a stop to performance gain claims that are based on "other" improvements. You've got a brand new core in your processor, it's not doing much memory access, I presume, to so even if you had a shared bus at 100MHz, it shouldn't make much, if any, difference at all.

--
Mats
ID: 31459 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31474 - Posted: 20 Nov 2006, 19:22:48 UTC - in response to Message 31459.  

And why would hypertransport make any sort of difference to Rosetta? Anyone claiming that would be as clever as saying that a Ferrari is better than a normal car in London City rush-hour traffic - it won't, because there's no room to benefit from the speed. As we've discussed before, a good machine (with large enough caches) will have 97%+ cache-hit-rate with Rosetta... You are the one who said you wanted to see a stop to performance gain claims that are based on "other" improvements. You've got a brand new core in your processor, it's not doing much memory access, I presume, to so even if you had a shared bus at 100MHz, it shouldn't make much, if any, difference at all.

--
Mats

I agree with you. Hypertransport is useless on Rosetta :), so does it on all the crunching workloads: A well programmed crunching algorythm will always fit in the case, or close to it.

I actually see performance improvement on Rosetta when i increase the front side bus speed, it is due to the fact that 3% can be compressed to 1% :)

In the racing world, 2% is great :)

who?
ID: 31474 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31492 - Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 4:36:25 UTC - in response to Message 31474.  

And why would hypertransport make any sort of difference to Rosetta? Anyone claiming that would be as clever as saying that a Ferrari is better than a normal car in London City rush-hour traffic - it won't, because there's no room to benefit from the speed. As we've discussed before, a good machine (with large enough caches) will have 97%+ cache-hit-rate with Rosetta... You are the one who said you wanted to see a stop to performance gain claims that are based on "other" improvements. You've got a brand new core in your processor, it's not doing much memory access, I presume, to so even if you had a shared bus at 100MHz, it shouldn't make much, if any, difference at all.

--
Mats

I agree with you. Hypertransport is useless on Rosetta :), so does it on all the crunching workloads: A well programmed crunching algorythm will always fit in the case, or close to it.

I actually see performance improvement on Rosetta when i increase the front side bus speed, it is due to the fact that 3% can be compressed to 1% :)

In the racing world, 2% is great :)

who?



I am upgrading the top machine to Vista, so, it will not be running over night.

who?
ID: 31492 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Michael G.R.

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 05
Posts: 264
Credit: 11,247,510
RAC: 0
Message 31495 - Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 5:48:00 UTC
Last modified: 21 Nov 2006, 5:48:10 UTC

How's the CPU overhead on Vista? Much of a difference, or are the requirements mostly for GPU and RAM?
ID: 31495 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
zombie67 [MM]
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Feb 06
Posts: 316
Credit: 6,347,141
RAC: 0
Message 31516 - Posted: 21 Nov 2006, 15:55:29 UTC - in response to Message 31492.  

I am upgrading the top machine to Vista, so, it will not be running over night.

Be sure to tell us the new machine id#, so we can continue to track it. Thanks!
Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA
ID: 31516 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31595 - Posted: 23 Nov 2006, 2:28:24 UTC - in response to Message 31516.  

I am upgrading the top machine to Vista, so, it will not be running over night.

Be sure to tell us the new machine id#, so we can continue to track it. Thanks!


You can t miss them .. both my machines are in the top 2 :-P

just enjoying it, sorry ;)

Who?
ID: 31595 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile River~~
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Dec 05
Posts: 761
Credit: 285,578
RAC: 0
Message 31634 - Posted: 24 Nov 2006, 16:18:55 UTC

then did you mistyoe the thread title - should it have been

who? will be the next king of the hill.
ID: 31634 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 31662 - Posted: 25 Nov 2006, 18:42:15 UTC - in response to Message 31634.  

then did you mistyoe the thread title - should it have been

who? will be the next king of the hill.


The real king is Core 2, not me :)

The Dual Xeon 5355 is about to get a RAC of 3000, i think it will stop at 3600.

who?
ID: 31662 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Gerry Rough
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 06
Posts: 111
Credit: 1,389,340
RAC: 0
Message 35100 - Posted: 20 Jan 2007, 0:10:31 UTC

I was thinking awhile back about how much a dual quad core would cost to build for a crunching box. What would it cost to build a serious cruncher?

(Click for detailed stats)
ID: 35100 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 35105 - Posted: 20 Jan 2007, 4:22:20 UTC - in response to Message 35100.  

I was thinking awhile back about how much a dual quad core would cost to build for a crunching box. What would it cost to build a serious cruncher?


The dual quad core xeon machine can be put together for 4500$ ..
I know it is expensive, but it is a killer


who?
ID: 35105 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
MikeMarsUK

Send message
Joined: 15 Jan 06
Posts: 121
Credit: 2,637,872
RAC: 0
Message 35113 - Posted: 20 Jan 2007, 11:17:12 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jan 2007, 11:20:12 UTC

If your constraint is 'most crunch for $" rather than "most crunch per box", you'd be better off with several overclocked quad core2s boxes instead for the same $4,500 ... i.e., like Who?'s quad system rather than his octo system.


PS we're experimenting with an SSE2 version of the climate model using Intel Fortran 9.1, will be a month or two until we know whether it gives the same climate physics as the non-SSE2. The previous time SSE2 was tried it gave different results, but looking better this time round.


ID: 35113 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Who?

Send message
Joined: 2 Apr 06
Posts: 213
Credit: 1,366,981
RAC: 0
Message 35124 - Posted: 20 Jan 2007, 14:53:00 UTC - in response to Message 35113.  
Last modified: 20 Jan 2007, 14:58:14 UTC

If your constraint is 'most crunch for $" rather than "most crunch per box", you'd be better off with several overclocked quad core2s boxes instead for the same $4,500 ... i.e., like Who?'s quad system rather than his octo system.


you can buy several nissan and drive them in parallel, or you can buy a lambo ... bragging right gets different with several nissan...
and if you use more machine, your density of computing will be terrible .. a lot of space, and your power usage will be almost double ...

your idea sound like a good idea, but if you considere that people doing processing only pay attention to processing power density and electric power, that is a very bad idea.

Based on this, the 8 Cores machine is the best choice.


PS we're experimenting with an SSE2 version of the climate model using Intel Fortran 9.1, will be a month or two until we know whether it gives the same climate physics as the non-SSE2. The previous time SSE2 was tried it gave different results, but looking better this time round.

well, SSE2 did not try to do anything, the programmer who did try to generate SSE2 didn t properly configure the SSE2 setting for x87 compatibility ... that is reality, SSE2 does to try by its own to change the calculation mode. the computers don t do errors, the errors comes from the operators!

who?
ID: 35124 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : who will be the next king of the hill?



©2023 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org