[Beowulf] Re: More cores/More processors/More nodes?
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.
Håkon Bugge Hakon.Bugge at scali.comFri Oct 6 01:52:37 PDT 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Explanation of error message in MPICH-1.2.7
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Depends on what you're asking. The benefit of running two times two processes per node probably stems from the fact that applications usage of interconnect is temporal in time. Hence, by running two application instances per node, the interconnect usage is more spread in time. The benefit of different policies of the process-to-processor binding depends on more issues. YMMV application wise. Further, some multicore processor have a shared cache between the cores (Woodcrest). Communication intensive apps might then benefit from this cache. Other apps tend to like running on two Opterons to get the luxery of (mostly) using two memory controllers. And others don't. Håkon At 23:15 05.10.2006, Mark Hahn wrote: >>On two-socket, dual core Opteron systems, we >>often see that throughput is enhanced by using >>two times two processes per node. > >just for the obvious reason? (memory bandwidth) -- Håkon Bugge CTO dir. +47 22 62 89 72 mob. +47 92 48 45 14 fax. +47 22 62 89 51 Hakon.Bugge at scali.com Skype: hakon_bugge Scali - http://www.scali.com Scaling the Linux Datacenter
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Explanation of error message in MPICH-1.2.7
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
