Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

On 12/5/08 8:52 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, the stacked DRAM stuff is interesting. Anyone visit the siXis booth at > SC08? They are stacking DRAM and FPGA dies directly onto SiCBs (Silicon > Circuits Boards). This allows for dramatically more IOs per chip and fin

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

All, Yes, the stacked DRAM stuff is interesting.  Anyone visit the siXis booth at SC08?  They are stacking DRAM and FPGA dies directly onto SiCBs (Silicon Circuits Boards).  This allows for dramatically more IOs per chip and finer traces throughout the board which is small, but made ent

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 06:32:24PM -0800, Bill Broadley wrote: > This is however rather new for CPUs, Intel's been dominating the market with > sub 10GB/sec memory systems for some time now, while AMD has had > 10GB/sec > for er, 3 generations now to little effect. Hey, now, that's a huge overgen

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Mark Hahn wrote: >> (Well, duh). > > yeah - the point seems to be that we (still) need to scale memory > along with core count. Which seems to be happening. Suddenly designers can get more real world performance by adding bandwidth. This isn't new in the GPU world of course where ATI and Nvidia

[Beowulf] Re: Intro question

> > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 08:59:22 -0800 > From: "Lux, James P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Intro question > To: Lawrence Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Robert G. Brown" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Beowulf Mailing List > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 01:48:43PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > (Well, duh). > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/nov08/6912 > > Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers > Where do GPUs fit in this? On the surface a handful of cores in a system with decent cache would quickly displace the need f

[Beowulf] mpi error: mca_oob_tcp_accept: accept() failed: Too many open files (24).

I'm getting huge logs with repeated errors of this sort: mca_oob_tcp_accept: accept() failed: Too many open files (24). I googled a bit and see that this seems to be an MPI complaint about too many files open. I checked ulimit and that says "unlimited" Any tips about what I ought to be looking a

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Joe Landman wrote: > Prentice Bisbal wrote: >> Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>> Very cheaply you can build nodes now with like 4 cheapo cpu's >>> and 128 GB ram inside. >>> >> >> Not exactly. 2 GB DIMMs are cheap, but as soon as you go to larger DIMMs >> (4 GB, 8 GB, etc.), the price goes up exponen

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 11:17:30AM -0500, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > In principle this might work, if you get the problem statement right, > and you can design and build the machine before the general purpose > machines catch up, and you don't make any mistakes, and after it is > built you can keep

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Prentice Bisbal wrote: Vincent Diepeveen wrote: Very cheaply you can build nodes now with like 4 cheapo cpu's and 128 GB ram inside. Not exactly. 2 GB DIMMs are cheap, but as soon as you go to larger DIMMs (4 GB, 8 GB, etc.), the price goes up exponentially. Less than a year ago, we purchas

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 01:30:36PM -0500, Prentice Bisbal wrote: > Not exactly. 2 GB DIMMs are cheap, but as soon as you go to larger DIMMs > (4 GB, 8 GB, etc.), the price goes up exponentially. My last quote for 2GB and 4GB dimms was linear. -- greg

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > Very cheaply you can build nodes now with like 4 cheapo cpu's > and 128 GB ram inside. > Not exactly. 2 GB DIMMs are cheap, but as soon as you go to larger DIMMs (4 GB, 8 GB, etc.), the price goes up exponentially. Less than a year ago, we purchased a couple of server

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Bruno Coutinho wrote: > Datamining is useful for both commercial and scientific world and is > very data-intensive, so I think this issue will be addressed, or at least > someone (Sun, for example) will build processors for data intensive > applications that are more balanced, but several times mo

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

Well every scientist who says he needs a lot of RAM now, ECC-DDR2 ram has a cost of near nothing right now. Very cheaply you can build nodes now with like 4 cheapo cpu's and 128 GB ram inside. There is no excuse for those who beg for big RAM to not buy a bunch of those nodes. What happens ea

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

2008/12/5 Robert G. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > >> (Well, duh). >> > > Good article, though, thanks. > > Of course the same could have been written (and probably was) back when > dual processors came out sharing a single memory bus, and for every > genera

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I had that much money, I too would try and buy a Nobel Prize in preference to a yacht. D. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lawrence Stewart Sent: 05 December 2008 16:18 To: Robert G. Brown Cc: Beowulf Mailing

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

On 12/5/08 8:17 AM, "Lawrence Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been to a couple of DE Shaw talks and I always come away puzzled. > > It's tempting to conclude that they are just smarter than I am, but > maybe they are just wrong. > > My understanding is they are building a special pur

RE: [Beowulf] Intro question

If I had that much money, I too would try and buy a Nobel Prize in preference to a yacht. D. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lawrence Stewart Sent: 05 December 2008 16:18 To: Robert G. Brown Cc: Beowulf Mailing List; Lux, James P Subject

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

I've been to a couple of DE Shaw talks and I always come away puzzled. It's tempting to conclude that they are just smarter than I am, but maybe they are just wrong. My understanding is they are building a special purpose molecular dynamics machine because it will be far faster than a general pur

RE: [Beowulf] Intro question

I too had an interview with DE Shaw Research a while back before I took up my current position At the time they did not have a UK office, and moving to NY was out of the question for me. In recent times they have been more open - and even gave a Keynote talk at this years' ISC in Dresden. As pr

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Lux, James P wrote: I read an article about D.E. Shaw that I wanted to link to, but couldn't find it. In that article, it said that not only is his company very secretive, but you don't apply there as much as they find you. They allegedly read all the academic journals And

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

On 12/5/08 5:47 AM, "Prentice Bisbal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Hearns wrote: >> >> >> 2008/12/5 Robert G. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> >> He has had ads in computer magazines -- at least small ads in the back >> -- for years and years. Usually for

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Prentice Bisbal wrote: John Hearns wrote: 2008/12/5 Robert G. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > He has had ads in computer magazines -- at least small ads in the back -- for years and years. Usually for physicists and mathematicians. One

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Eugen Leitl wrote: (Well, duh). Good article, though, thanks. Of course the same could have been written (and probably was) back when dual processors came out sharing a single memory bus, and for every generation since. The memory lag has been around forever -- multicore

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

John Hearns wrote: > > > 2008/12/5 Robert G. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > He has had ads in computer magazines -- at least small ads in the back > -- for years and years. Usually for physicists and mathematicians. One > of the few people it looke

Re: [Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

(Well, duh). yeah - the point seems to be that we (still) need to scale memory along with core count. not just memory bandwidth but also concurrency (number of banks), though "ieee spectrum online for tech insiders" doesn't get into that kind of depth :( I still usually explain this as "tradit

[Beowulf] Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers

(Well, duh). http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/nov08/6912 Multicore Is Bad News For Supercomputers By Samuel K. Moore Image: Sandia Trouble Ahead: More cores per chip will slow some programs [red] unless there’s a big boost in memory bandwidth [yellow With no other way to improve the performance

Re: [Beowulf] Intro question

2008/12/5 Robert G. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > He has had ads in computer magazines -- at least small ads in the back > -- for years and years. Usually for physicists and mathematicians. One > of the few people it looked like it would be interesting to work for, > actually. > > I was very int