Processor contention(?) and network bandwidth on AMD
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.
Joshua Baker-LePain jlb17 at duke.eduTue Apr 30 12:50:58 PDT 2002
- Previous message: Processor contention(?) and network bandwidth on AMD
- Next message: Processor contention(?) and network bandwidth on AMD
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002 at 5:07pm, Robert G. Brown wrote > Try this: > > Do your netpipe transmitter on an unloaded host, a host at load 1 and > at load 2. > Do your netpipe receiver on an unloaded host, a host at load 1 and one > at load 2. > > Fill in the matrix -- load 0 to load 0, load 0 to load 1, etc. > > I found (in similar tests done years ago) that a TRANSMITTER could be > loaded to 2 (per cpu) with only a small degradation of throughput, but > loading a RECEIVER would drop throughput dramatically, by as much as > 50%. Done -- the results are at <http://www.duke.edu/~jlb17/bwtest.pdf>. Keep in mind these were pretty quick and dirty tests using the systems I have on hand. Between Athlon systems, it seems the transmitter vs. receiver loading doesn't make much of a difference. A newer Intel based system (dual PIIIs on a Serverworks HE-SL chipset) shows the same bandwidth hit with overload as the Athlon systems. But older systems (well, a couple of years anyway) don't show this hit, which is what set me off on all this. Maybe it's an issue of chipset support? Anyways, thanks for listening to me babble on about all this. -- Joshua Baker-LePain Department of Biomedical Engineering Duke University
- Previous message: Processor contention(?) and network bandwidth on AMD
- Next message: Processor contention(?) and network bandwidth on AMD
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
