[Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
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.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at pathscale.comThu Feb 10 18:36:20 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 01:35:06PM -0700, Maurice Hilarius wrote: > Further, all of these lovely benchmarks lack one really important detail: > Comparisons between different interfaces and drivers MUST show CPU usage > while running them. No. If you want to look at that, run a real application and watch the wall time. It's extremely hard to get a good estimate of cpu usage out of a microbenchmark, and running "top" or /bin/time to do it is definitely bogus. > If I have a fantastic device that uses infinitely small time (latency) > and moves huge amounts of data (bandwidth) but in doing so it takes 80% > of a CPU, we do not have a useful solution.. If large cpu usage is a problem, it will show up nicely in real application benchmarks. > What we all need is some form of useful standardized benchmarks that > looks like real world code from a number of different disciplines, that > we can use to test the hardware, so we may compare results in a > meaningful manner. Amen. So use the MM5 t3a benchmark, maybe even SPEC HPC, the canned benchmarks for Amber, Charmm, DL_POLY, etc. The NAS Parallel Benchmarks are also good, they are much closer to real apps than microbenchmarks. -- greg
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
