[Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades
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.
Steve Herborn herborn at usna.eduTue May 12 12:38:58 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades
- Next message: [Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Well to me it isn't wishing. I guess it is all going to depend on how BIG your buy is, but I usually like to have them benchmark my application on whatever hardware they are proposing if it is different then my current. If you are having success with AMD, and as you say "In the interest of homogeneity" I'd probably stick with the architecture I'm already running if just adding a couple of nodes. One thing about the Top500, they are the Top500 of those submitted, not of all systems out there. There are many reasons why somebody wouldn't want their system submitted -- for example people who names are three letter acronyms. Steven A. Herborn U.S. Naval Academy Advanced Research Computing 410-293-6480 (Desk) 757-418-0505 (Cell) -----Original Message----- From: beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org [mailto:beowulf-bounces at beowulf.org] On Behalf Of Rahul Nabar Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:20 PM To: Beowulf Mailing List Subject: [Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades I'm currently shopping around for a cluster-expansion and was shopping for options. Anybody out here who's bought new hardware in the recent past? Any suggestions? Any horror stories? We've been using Dell SC1435's with Quad-Core AMD 2354 Opterons @ 2.2GHz. 16 Gig RAM. Any new-cutting edge stuff I ought to be asking my vendors to put into the quotes? I already have gigabit bonded backbones and don't think we have the financial muscle to upgrade to Myrinet or Infiniband yet. In the interest of homogeniety and not wanting to have dual trees of executibles I might be tempted to stick with AMDs unless there is compelling temptation otherwise. I am already looking at the CPU benchmarks on the Intel/AMD websites but they can sometimes be misleading / misrepresenting other than the obvious glaring conflict of interest. I rather trust first-hand anecdotal evidence from you guys actually administering them for scientific applications. Unless there is a good third party, relevant database? For some reason the top500 sublists seem skewed to prefer the Intel Xeons. Why so few Opterons or any other AMD hardware? Just curious if this is driven by technological inferiority of only a marketing effect. My vendor seems to be trying to steer me towards an Intel Nehalem or Clovertown for whatever reasons good or bad. Ultimately of course, it might be best if I just got to benchmark my very own application on these CPUs before I bought them. But that's just wishing I guess! -- Rahul _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
- Previous message: [Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades
- Next message: [Beowulf] recommendations for cluster upgrades
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
