Archives


- Beowulf
- Beowulf Announce
- Scyld-users
- Beowulf on Debian

Anyone have information on latest LSU beowulf?

Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.

Search

Craig Tierney ctierney at hpti.com
Thu Oct 10 08:54:00 PDT 2002


On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 12:39:03PM -0400, Patrick Geoffray wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-10-09 at 12:07, Craig Tierney wrote:
> 
> > This says that NB=40 is good for the PIII which has a larger
> > L1 cache than a P4 (16k data vs. 8k).  NB should be a multiple
> > of 32 for the P4.  I would like to try it out on a PIII, I would
> > think that 44 is a better value based on cache size.  I tried
> > all these tricks on an Alpha was 16k L1 cache and found 88 (44*2)
> > best.
> 
> Which value is used by ATLAS ? Stick with it. It may be 40 or 32 or
> whatever, but it will be the granularity of DGEMM used in HPL.
> If 32 is the block size used by ATLAS, try ro tun with NB as 32, 64, 96
> and 128.

It seems that I was wrong about the NB size.  I thought I had tested it, but
not on 500 processors.  Here are my results from 2 runs (250 dual xeon 2.2Ghz).
These were on different systems.

In my ATLAS summary, NB=48 is being used.

Run 1:
W01R2L6       125000   160    20    25            1329.60          9.793e+02
W01R2L6       125000    80    20    25            1343.96          9.689e+02
W01R2L6       125000    96    20    25            1372.81          9.485e+02
W01R2L6       125000   192    20    25            1412.41          9.219e+02
W01R2L6       125000    64    20    25            1415.00          9.202e+02
W01R2L6       125000   128    20    25            1575.68          8.264e+02

Run 2:
W01R2L6       125000   160    20    25            1345.82          9.675e+02
W01R2L6       125000    80    20    25            1387.60          9.384e+02
W01R2L6       125000    96    20    25            1415.53          9.199e+02
W01R2L6       125000    64    20    25            1422.12          9.156e+02
W01R2L6       125000   192    20    25            1442.42          9.027e+02
W01R2L6       125000   128    20    25            1596.93          8.154e+02

The NB=192 case failed to give the correct result on both runs.

80 and 160 give the best results on this problem.  I will continue to test with
these numbers.

Craig




> 
> Patrick
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> |   Patrick Geoffray, Ph.D.      patrick at myri.com 
> |   Myricom, Inc.                http://www.myri.com
> |   Cell:  865-389-8852          685 Emory Valley Rd (B)
> |   Phone: 626-821-5555          Oak Ridge, TN 37830
> ----------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Craig Tierney (ctierney at hpti.com)



More information about the Beowulf mailing list