[Beowulf] Woodcrest Memory bandwidth
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.
Jason Holmes jholmes at psu.eduMon Aug 14 13:16:07 PDT 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Woodcrest Memory bandwidth
- Next message: [Beowulf] Woodcrest Memory bandwidth
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Joe Landman wrote: > > I have it on good authority that with the other chipset (we have a > Blackford here), we should see higher numbers. Not exceeding the > Opteron 275 though. We have both a greencreek based (the one with the snoop filter.. I guess they're calling it the 5000x now) and a blackford based system and I'm not seeing any difference beyond a percent or two of performance either in stream or in real applications. Maybe we just haven't hit the magic app that greencreek helps yet. > What I can say is that Woodcrest is interesting. It just may be > overhyped by a "compliant" media. I'd say it's a bit overhyped, but it is giving us some good real application numbers compared to the opterons. On NAMD, Amber, and VASP so far, we've seen 2.66 GHz Woodcrest between 10-20% faster than our 2.4 GHz dual-core Opterons while using all 4 processors in a box. It's not the 50% media hype numbers, but it's definitely an improvement on the Intel side. Thanks, -- Jason Holmes
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Woodcrest Memory bandwidth
- Next message: [Beowulf] Woodcrest Memory bandwidth
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
