[Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
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.
Joe Landman landman at scalableinformatics.comSun Nov 21 21:57:35 PST 2004
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
- Next message: [Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi John: Opteron is a newcomer to the stage. A stable OS for it has been available for a relatively short period of time (SuSE, and very late model RHEL, though it does not shine until you get a 2.6 kernel on there, so RHEL is out of serious contention until RHEL 4). SuSE with a reasonable kernel has only been available for a few months. EM64t uses the same northbridge/southbridge design as the Xeon. This means that multiprocessors are going to be not very good in SMP performance, just like the Xeon's (and I am sure some folks will disagree, but I am thinking of memory bandwidth hungry apps). The chipset is the bottleneck. Compare that to the Opteron. SC'04 was chock full of folks showing off 4 and 8 way Opteron's. There were other things there not on the show floor that were *very* interesting. I am not sure what impact Nocona will have. I reserve judgement until I get to see one/play with one, and see its future path. Lots of interesting conversations were had at SC. The quote from Mark Twain may be apt. If a Nocona follow-on follows the design of the Opteron (IOMMU and HT, among other things), then things could get quite interesting. Joe john.hearns at clustervision.com wrote: >I spotted this article on The Register. > >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/19/amd_top500_loss/ > >As someone who has installed Opteron clusters, including what I believe was the >first in the UK (used for computational chemistry, and going strong), >I disagree with this article. >Opteron are alive and kicking. > >What's more the article confuses 'supercomputer' with '(super)computer in >the Top 500' >and also makes no mention of EMT64/Nocona. The artcle says Xeon/Itanium, >then goes on to talk about 32 bit Xeon. > >The fact that there are fewer Opteron based systems in the Top 500 is >irrefutable (I didn't know this) but it makes me uneasy to extrapolate >this to the impending death of a CPU. > >I DO agree (and let's have some debate here) that Nocona is bound to make >big inroads. > >_______________________________________________ >Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org >To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf > > -- Joseph Landman, Ph.D Scalable Informatics LLC, email: landman at scalableinformatics.com web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
- Next message: [Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
