Kyle Spaans wrote:
> Actually some keywords I forgot to mention that might come in handy are:
> Scyld, Rocks, Oscar, Condor
Warewulf
--
Geoffrey D. Jacobs
Go to the Chinese Restaurant,
Order the Special
___
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To
> I just purchased 4 used PIII computers and Red Hat 7.1
> and would like to begin learning about cluster
> computing. Where should I start?
I think you'll get more out of it if you have a *reason* to run a Beowulf. Check
the ClusterMonkey 'Value Cluster' artilces for a lot of useful ideas re
sug
Actually some keywords I forgot to mention that might come in handy are:
Scyld, Rocks, Oscar, Condor
___
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beo
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 05:27, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> I will note that on Woodcrest & Core2 cores, the PathScale compilers
> do (relatively speaking) a lot better than on previous Intel cpus.
> So there's an option.
Have they moved to FlexLM yet ? We had PathScale on eval for a while but
fo
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 02:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
> So until end 2007 the core2 annihilates any opteron system.
In my experience with both architectures it depends on what you want out of a
box, and what you're running on it, as well as your power constraints..
There is a good reason
At 02:23 PM 11/6/2006, Kyle Spaans wrote:
Welcome!
You're in the same boat as me.
I've found that just browsing ClusterMonkey, and reading the intro
document on the beowulf.org website to be very helpful. Being
subscribed to this list also helps. The odd relevant [to us begginners
that is] discus
--snip--
> But another poster's suggestion go to ClusterMonkey is a good
> one. There's some tutorials there on getting revved up on the first
> go around.ClusterWorld magazine had some tutorials too (is it
> online? I just have the paper copies lying around)
Actually ClusterMonkey is run
Future Cluster Geeks:
I would be very interested if there is anything that
you think is "missing" in your search. i.e. what big questions
do you have to which you cannot easily find an answer ?
My invitation extends to all the beginners on the list.
No question is to stupid or silly. Reading thes
At 12:45 PM 11/6/2006, Mark Hahn wrote:
Is there a beginners forum to subscribe to?
why a forum? there are tons of excellent resources on the web
that you can read to get up-to-speed. it's a lot more time-effective
for everyone if you pick up the background first.
I just purchased 4 used PI
Welcome!
You're in the same boat as me.
I've found that just browsing ClusterMonkey, and reading the intro
document on the beowulf.org website to be very helpful. Being
subscribed to this list also helps. The odd relevant [to us begginners
that is] discussion.If you are looking for things to read,
Is there a beginners forum to subscribe to?
why a forum? there are tons of excellent resources on the web
that you can read to get up-to-speed. it's a lot more time-effective
for everyone if you pick up the background first.
I just purchased 4 used PIII computers and Red Hat 7.1
why the he
Is Simple Scalar(http://simplescalar.com/) good forr testing beowulf
clusters?
but why? simplescalar appears to be an ISA simulator, which I would guess
would exibit a relatively small memory footprint and lots of branchy,
mostly-int code. if that's the case, then it would make a pretty poor
Joe Landman wrote:
Richard Walsh wrote:
Joe Landman wrote:
We are working on a machine with 2 Opteron 2218s. For laughs, I ran
streams on it. Here are 1,2,3,4 processor data.
1 processor:
Copy: 5713.9944 0.0591 0.0560 0.0600
Scale: 5713.9822 0.0587 0.056
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
Greg Lindahl wrote:
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 06:38:25PM -0500, Joe Landman wrote:
Since they wish to do it only for Intel processors, and the world
is decidedly mixed, this has implications on the use of Intel compilers
for lots of people wishing to get the best performance on all platforms
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 06:38:25PM -0500, Joe Landman wrote:
> Since they wish to do it only for Intel processors, and the world
> is decidedly mixed, this has implications on the use of Intel compilers
> for lots of people wishing to get the best performance on all platforms
> with a single co
Check out ClusterMonkey.net
Particularly the New to Clusters section. It will
help you navigate some of the issues.
http://www.clustermonkey.net//content/view/91/44/
--
Doug
> Is there a beginners forum to subscribe to?
> I just purchased 4 used PIII computers and Red Hat 7.1
> and would
Thanks for your answer.
Please show us results of prime95 (iteration times is already enough) please
to prove your marketing talk regarding floating point unit of
existing K8 chips..
Paper benchmarks of items that are not even close to be able to get bought
in shops happen just a bit too much
Is Simple Scalar(http://simplescalar.com/) good forr testing beowulf clusters?Kind regards,Shyaam
___
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
---
CALL FOR PAPERS
The 7th International Workshop on
GLOBAL AND PEER-TO-PEER COMPUTING (GP2PC'07)
"Observation, Experience and Application"
Is there a beginners forum to subscribe to?
I just purchased 4 used PIII computers and Red Hat 7.1
and would like to begin learning about cluster
computing. Where should I start?
Get your email and see which of
Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
OK, I feel like trying this one (call me stupid if you will).
Thanks for your info, this is very helpful.
So until end 2007 the core2 annihilates any opteron system.
No! This may be true for your application, but it's not
true for all applications. I have a c
Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
[...]
So which one is faster - Woodcrest or Opteron - really
depends on your code.
Yup.
Most of the testing I have done, where Woodcrest is faster appears to be
linked to the cache size. Since I used the PGI compilers, and built a
single binary (not the mixed bina
Richard Walsh wrote:
Joe Landman wrote:
We are working on a machine with 2 Opteron 2218s. For laughs, I ran
streams on it. Here are 1,2,3,4 processor data.
1 processor:
Copy: 5713.9944 0.0591 0.0560 0.0600
Scale: 5713.9822 0.0587 0.0560 0.0600
Add:
OK, I feel like trying this one (call me stupid if you will).
Thanks for your info, this is very helpful.
So until end 2007 the core2 annihilates any opteron system.
No! This may be true for your application, but it's not
true for all applications. I have a couple of applications wher
If you are heading to SC06 in Tampa next week, you may be interested
in the following (if not just ignore this mailing).
Over the last month or so I have been banging on two
dual socket quad-core 1U nodes from Appro.
That is 16 cores total. The nodes are connected
by GigE and Mellanox Infiniband.
Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
Thanks for your info, this is very helpful.
So until end 2007 the core2 annihilates any opteron system.
Nope. Dual-core socket F does quite a bit to even the score
on floating-point, just with the DDR2 latency and bandwidth
improvements. I would not use the w
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006 at 8:57am, Jeffrey B. Layton wrote
I'm also not sure if LS-Dyna is built with the Intel compilers or
not. This will also have an impact on performance since you have
to _dumb-down_ the compile options to get it to run on Opteron
(I mentioned this to Joe Landman, but for everyo
Thanks for your info, this is very helpful.
So until end 2007 the core2 annihilates any opteron system.
Except of course when you're interested in just measuring bandwidth.
So the K8L should then take over from core2 the performance reign again.
Wasn't that K8L also going to do 4 instructions
Joe Landman wrote:
We are working on a machine with 2 Opteron 2218s. For laughs, I ran
streams on it. Here are 1,2,3,4 processor data.
1 processor:
Copy: 5713.9944 0.0591 0.0560 0.0600
Scale: 5713.9822 0.0587 0.0560 0.0600
Add:5454.2389 0
Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
Impressive bandwidth.
Is this the so called 'k8h' revision which has improved SSE2 throughput?
The socket F series is generally referred to as K8L (revision H).
The dual-core
is already available and is primarily a pin-count and memory
controller upgrade
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 at 8:54am, Joe Landman wrote
Initial benchmarks (2.6 GHz clock) put it at about 17% faster than
Opteron 275 and Woodcrest 5150 (2.66 GHz) on a GAMESS test we use
(1h41m for Woodcrest and 275, and 1h26m for this unit).
I'd be very interested to se
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 at 8:54am, Joe Landman wrote
Initial benchmarks (2.6 GHz clock) put it at about 17% faster than Opteron
275 and Woodcrest 5150 (2.66 GHz) on a GAMESS test we use (1h41m for
Woodcrest and 275, and 1h26m for this unit).
I'd be very interested to see any application benchmarks
33 matches
Mail list logo
