Mac Pro, 8 cores

Message boards : Number crunching : Mac Pro, 8 cores

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Michael G.R.

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 05
Posts: 264
Credit: 11,246,222
RAC: 22
Message 51417 - Posted: 15 Feb 2008, 20:24:07 UTC

So I bought a Mac Pro, 8 Xeon Penryn cores at 2.8ghz each.

Within a couple of weeks, I'll have crunched more for Rosetta with it than with my other computers in the past couple of years.

Ah! Technology!

Am also excited about the new version of Rosetta (mini). Hopefully this will mean even better science and an easier time optimizing the software (SSEx, PS3, etc).
ID: 51417 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile David Emigh
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 13 Mar 06
Posts: 158
Credit: 417,178
RAC: 0
Message 51419 - Posted: 15 Feb 2008, 22:57:07 UTC

Congrats on the octo-core!

Happy crunching (and whatever you do with it IRL) =)
Rosie, Rosie, she's our gal,
If she can't do it, no one shall!
ID: 51419 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
The_Bad_Penguin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jun 06
Posts: 2751
Credit: 2,922,183
RAC: 2,797
Message 51423 - Posted: 16 Feb 2008, 14:34:13 UTC

N I C E ! ! !

Hope SkullTrail isn't too far off...
ID: 51423 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Natronomonas

Send message
Joined: 11 Jan 06
Posts: 38
Credit: 536,978
RAC: 0
Message 51462 - Posted: 17 Feb 2008, 23:01:07 UTC

The power requirements on Skulltrail are so steep I'd say you're probably better off with Xeons, or a couple of 45nm quads... the chipsets on the Skulltrail board aren't exactly frugal.
Crunching Rosetta as a member of the Whirlpool BOINC Teams
ID: 51462 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Stephen

Send message
Joined: 5 Jun 06
Posts: 23
Credit: 2,570,438
RAC: 0
Message 51729 - Posted: 29 Feb 2008, 23:35:38 UTC

I hope to do the same once I feel that the price/performance for a quad core is at a sweet spot.

Stephen
ID: 51729 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
zombie67 [MM]
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Feb 06
Posts: 316
Credit: 6,302,052
RAC: 0
Message 51756 - Posted: 2 Mar 2008, 5:24:12 UTC - in response to Message 51417.  

So I bought a Mac Pro, 8 Xeon Penryn cores at 2.8ghz each.

Within a couple of weeks, I'll have crunched more for Rosetta with it than with my other computers in the past couple of years.


"Awesome. Awesome to the max." -- '80s Guy, Futurama

Am also excited about the new version of Rosetta (mini). Hopefully this will mean even better science and an easier time optimizing the software (SSEx, PS3, etc).


+1

Esp. for intel macs. All of them support SSE3 or greater. No legacy processor support holding it back.
Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA
ID: 51756 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Michael G.R.

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 05
Posts: 264
Credit: 11,246,222
RAC: 22
Message 51767 - Posted: 2 Mar 2008, 19:37:06 UTC - in response to Message 51756.  

Esp. for intel macs. All of them support SSE3 or greater. No legacy processor support holding it back.


Yeah. Even with non-Mac x86, an argument can probably made that the few old computers that would be lost by using SSE2 would be far more than compensated by the increased productivity of the current recent ones, plus the recent ones that are adding all the time to the project.

The bottom line is the science. If you can do more science by ditching some old P3s and K6s, I think the project should do it.
ID: 51767 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
transient
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Sep 06
Posts: 376
Credit: 10,733,571
RAC: 3,079
Message 51781 - Posted: 3 Mar 2008, 16:26:39 UTC - in response to Message 51767.  

Esp. for intel macs. All of them support SSE3 or greater. No legacy processor support holding it back.


Yeah. Even with non-Mac x86, an argument can probably made that the few old computers that would be lost by using SSE2 would be far more than compensated by the increased productivity of the current recent ones, plus the recent ones that are adding all the time to the project.

The bottom line is the science. If you can do more science by ditching some old P3s and K6s, I think the project should do it.


Maybe, but you would have to do a study on the processing power lost by ditching the oldies vs. processing power gained by being able optimize for those newer processors.

Furthermore a argument could be made, I think, for it being a problem solved by time (people updating their boxes)
ID: 51781 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Michael G.R.

Send message
Joined: 11 Nov 05
Posts: 264
Credit: 11,246,222
RAC: 22
Message 51803 - Posted: 4 Mar 2008, 21:19:56 UTC
Last modified: 4 Mar 2008, 21:20:30 UTC

I've tried to think of many scenarios, and none of them could realistically mean losing crunching power.

With each day that goes by, new SSE/SSE2 capable computers are joining.

Non-SSE capable crunchers are by definition older and slower, they represent the bottom x% (10%?) of production. There's almost no way that losing those wouldn't be offset by making the remaining crunchers (90%?) faster with SSE instructions (could be significant, but even if it is just 10% faster, that would more than offset the old machines and keep getting bigger as new ones join).
ID: 51803 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Snake Doctor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 05
Posts: 182
Credit: 6,401,938
RAC: 0
Message 51807 - Posted: 5 Mar 2008, 7:04:22 UTC - in response to Message 51417.  

So I bought a Mac Pro, 8 Xeon Penryn cores at 2.8ghz each.

Within a couple of weeks, I'll have crunched more for Rosetta with it than with my other computers in the past couple of years.

Ah! Technology!

Am also excited about the new version of Rosetta (mini). Hopefully this will mean even better science and an easier time optimizing the software (SSEx, PS3, etc).


If you like the 2,8, You should see the 3.0GHz go.

Regards


We Must look for intelligent life on other planets as,
it is becoming increasingly apparent we will not find any on our own.
ID: 51807 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Paydirt
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 127
Credit: 960,607
RAC: 0
Message 51847 - Posted: 7 Mar 2008, 22:00:52 UTC

And its not just about an increase in processing power, but also save a decent amount of electrical power and space to get rid of those old machines.

An extreme example would be F@H's GPU folding... The newer ATI GPUs may do TWICE the work of the old ones and use 50% less power (while folding). Over the course of the year, that $180 card could save $100/year in electricity costs. So the card pays for itself!
ID: 51847 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Paul

Send message
Joined: 29 Oct 05
Posts: 190
Credit: 62,350,079
RAC: 3,074
Message 51863 - Posted: 9 Mar 2008, 12:38:02 UTC - in response to Message 51847.  

And its not just about an increase in processing power, but also save a decent amount of electrical power and space to get rid of those old machines.

An extreme example would be F@H's GPU folding... The newer ATI GPUs may do TWICE the work of the old ones and use 50% less power (while folding). Over the course of the year, that $180 card could save $100/year in electricity costs. So the card pays for itself!


Hey Project Team!!

Your progress thus far is great. We want to love the new Rosetta Mini. Help us love it by adding GPU support and maybe even support for the PS3. It would also be good to see processor optimized support if you can find a way to get performance enhancements from SSE2, SSE3 or SSE4.

This is a great project.


Thx!

Paul

ID: 51863 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive    Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : Mac Pro, 8 cores



©2021 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org