[Beowulf] Thought that this might be of interest
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.
Scott Atchley atchley at myri.comMon Nov 6 12:09:59 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Thought that this might be of interest
- Next message: [Beowulf] Thought that this might be of interest
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Nov 6, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Jeffrey B. Layton wrote: >> Some codes are also outliers, for example Fluent on Woodcrest does >> great, if I remember correctly. > > The Fluent benchmarks need to be explained. There are basically > 9 benchmarks (small, medium, and large models). On the small > and medium models the Woodcrest kicks butt on a single node > (1-4 cores) mostly due to the cache size. On some of the large > models, the Woodcrest does very well on a single node (1-4 CPUs). > But on some of the large models, the Opteron does very well. While benchmarking MX-10G, my contacts at Fluent said that only the three large models are useful these days for comparing systems (i.e. the small and medium datasets no longer represent what their customers use). Scott -- Scott Atchley Myricom Inc. http://www.myri.com
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Thought that this might be of interest
- Next message: [Beowulf] Thought that this might be of interest
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
