[Beowulf] [kathleen@massivelyparallel.com: RE: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?)]
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.
Eugen Leitl eugen at leitl.orgSat Jan 14 08:22:34 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [kathleen@massivelyparallel.com: RE: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?)]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [landman@scalableinformatics.com: Re: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?)]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
----- Forwarded message from Kathleen <kathleen at massivelyparallel.com> ----- From: Kathleen <kathleen at massivelyparallel.com> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:15:59 -0700 To: "'Clustering, compute farming & distributed computing in life science informatics'" <bioclusters at bioinformatics.org> Subject: RE: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?) X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Reply-To: "Clustering, compute farming & distributed computing in life science informatics" <bioclusters at bioinformatics.org> > TIA: > > One thing to consider when using FPGAs for bioinformatics or any > complex computational life science application is whether or not the > FPGA supports cross coupled communication. ... which is needed in which algorithms? >From what I'm learning, cross communication is less likely an issue in transactional-based problems. Protein-folding would be a great example of a non-transactional problem that is tightly coupled (needs cross communication) and benefits from being spread across multiple nodes. It sounds like the re-programmable FPGA's might do cross-communication. I'd be curious to know at what cost and what does the overhead look like to submit job, scatter job, compute job, and gather results. We have proven linear to super linear scaling on COTS, with negligeable overhead. Node count for our technology is unlimited. Our scaling drops off when we run out of work. > I believe FPGAs do not, therefore, FPGAs will be limited in > scalability, performance and very expensive. FPGA performance on various algorithms is already 1 to 2 orders of magnitude (e.g. 10 to 100 times) faster than single CPUs. The price points of modern FPGA boards with modern algorithms is about 2-4x single node pricing. As FPGAs improve (and they are), expect to achieve significantly more performance. Can a user intermix FPGAs with COTS-based technology or do they need to scrap their whole investment? What if one FPGA on a board fails? How easy is it to swap that out? Do you swap out just the failed FPGA or the whole board? Who would swap that out? What happens to the work allocated to the failed FPGA, does it get dynamically re-directed? What is the max # of FPGAs for a single board and does each board cross communicate? _______________________________________________ Bioclusters maillist - Bioclusters at bioinformatics.org https://bioinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/bioclusters ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://www.scyld.com/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20060114/bfc352a0/attachment.bin
- Previous message: [Beowulf] [kathleen@massivelyparallel.com: RE: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?)]
- Next message: [Beowulf] [landman@scalableinformatics.com: Re: [Bioclusters] FPGA in bioinformatics clusters (again?)]
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
