[Beowulf] Nehalem memory configs
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 Clinton jclinton at advancedclustering.comSun Apr 12 20:43:31 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Nehalem memory configs
- Next message: [Beowulf] Nehalem memory configs
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Peter Kjellstrom <cap at nsc.liu.se> wrote: > Can anyone confirm that mixing different sizes of dimms, even when keeping > to > a by-three-symmetric configuration, actually does degrade performance? > > That is, first hand information that config 1 will be slower than config 2: > > 1: two sockets, 3x 1G and 3x 2G per socket RDIMM (total 18G @1066) > 2: two sockets, 6x 1G(or 2G) per socket RDIMM (total 12G (or 24G) @1066) No, it does not degrade performance as long as the CAS latencies of both DIMM types are identical and you would not get a clock-down by using that quantity of RAM ranks. We have been able to attain Intel's reported, magical 35GB/s number using ICC. GCC 4.3 is around 31GB/s. (At 1333MHz.) We're a little reticent to approach this, though. It's certainly easier to explain whole units of divisible RAM quantities to customers. The whole tri-channel memory thing is already hard enough to have a conversation about. Especially when people write their specs as X GB of memory per core--where X is power of two. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.scyld.com/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20090412/d0a79088/attachment.html
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Nehalem memory configs
- Next message: [Beowulf] Nehalem memory configs
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
