[Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3
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.
John Hearns john.hearns at streamline-computing.comTue Jul 12 23:18:25 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 21:00 -0700, Greg Lindahl wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:36:15AM -0500, Don Kinghorn wrote: > > > The dual-core system had 4 one GB modules arranged 2 for each cpu. > > To be anal-hyphen-retentive, don't you mean "2 for each socket"? > Acktcherly.... we do need to decide on a terminology here. I recently did a response to a tender for a prospective customer. I was tying myself in knots getting the correct terminology, for questions such as "the systems MUST have xxx gigabytes of RAM per processor" I went with reading that as 'per socket' in the case of dual cores. Also talking about 'dual nodes' is going to be more tricky.
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: dual core Opteron performance - re suse 9.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
