rbw that is actually true 4th quater of this year intel is release its first
8 core with hyperthreading processor to the xenon market. amd currently
already has their 6 core out.
i understand the reasoning you made about recycling them David, which saves
the company money as a whole on manufacturin
In message from Greg Lindahl (Thu, 20 Aug 2009
11:23:25 -0700):
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:06:07PM +0200, Reuti wrote:
AFAIK, initrd (as the kernel itself) is "universal" for
EM64T/x86-64,
The problem is not the type of CPU, but the chipset (i.e. the
necessary
kernel module) with which the
>- Original Message -
>From: "David Mathog"
>To: beowulf@beowulf.org
>Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:33:38 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
>Subject: [Beowulf] Re: amd 3 and 6 core processors
>
>Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
>
>> a friend of mine told me that the amd tri cores we
In message from "David Mathog" (Thu, 20 Aug 2009
11:29:17 -0700):
"Mikhail Kuzminsky" wrote:
I moved Western Digital SATA HDD w/SuSE 10.3 installed (on dual
Barcelona server) to dual Nehalem server (master HDD on Nehalem
server) with Supermicro X8DTi mobo.
Which means any number of drivers
Yes. Amd tri-cores were quad cores with a defective core, so they disable
the defective core
And amd isn't alone. Nvidia Geforce GTX 260s were GTX 280s with disabled
stream processors.
2009/8/20 Jonathan Aquilina
> a friend of mine told me that the amd tri cores were quads with one core
> disba
Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> a friend of mine told me that the amd tri cores were quads with one core
> disabled?
Probably. It will often be the case that the disabled core is
defective, maybe not fully dead, but it did not pass all of its tests.
It is common practice to recycle multicore CPUs w
a friend of mine told me that the amd tri cores were quads with one core
disbaled?
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Greg Lindahl wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 06:10:43PM +0200, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
>
> > someone brought this up in another post and instead of hyjacking that
> post i
> > st
"Mikhail Kuzminsky" wrote:
> I moved Western Digital SATA HDD w/SuSE 10.3 installed (on dual
> Barcelona server) to dual Nehalem server (master HDD on Nehalem
> server) with Supermicro X8DTi mobo.
Which means any number of drivers will have to change. The boot could
only succeed if all of the
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 06:10:43PM +0200, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> someone brought this up in another post and instead of hyjacking that post i
> started a new one. what are the advantages of having processors that defy
> the normal development and progressions of cores.
>
> 2 4 8 etc like inte
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:06:07PM +0200, Reuti wrote:
>> AFAIK, initrd (as the kernel itself) is "universal" for EM64T/x86-64,
>
> The problem is not the type of CPU, but the chipset (i.e. the necessary
> kernel module) with which the HDD is accessed.
There are 2 aspects to this:
1: /etc/modpr
Am 20.08.2009 um 19:33 schrieb Mikhail Kuzminsky:
In message from Reuti (Thu, 20 Aug
2009 19:02:49 +0200):
Am 20.08.2009 um 16:29 schrieb Mikhail Kuzminsky:
In message from Reuti (Wed, 19 Aug
2009 21:07:19 +0200):
Maybe the disk id is different form the one recored in /etc/
fstab. Wh
Am 20.08.2009 um 16:29 schrieb Mikhail Kuzminsky:
In message from Reuti (Wed, 19 Aug
2009 21:07:19 +0200):
Maybe the disk id is different form the one recored in /etc/fstab.
What about using plain /dev/sda1 or alike, or mounting by volume
label?
At the moment of problem /etc/fstab, as
someone brought this up in another post and instead of hyjacking that post i
started a new one. what are the advantages of having processors that defy
the normal development and progressions of cores.
2 4 8 etc like intel follows but amd seems to have done 2 3 4 6 ?
what advantage will these kind
I haven't seen anybody here talking about the 6-core AMD CPU's yet. Is
anybody trying these out? Anybody have real-world comparisons (say WRF) of
scalability of a 12-core system vs. a 16 thread Nehalem system?
Thanks,
Steve
___
Beowulf mailing lis
In message from Reuti (Wed, 19 Aug 2009
21:07:19 +0200):
Maybe the disk id is different form the one recored in /etc/fstab.
What about using plain /dev/sda1 or alike, or mounting by volume
label?
At the moment of problem /etc/fstab, as I understand, isn't used. And
/dev/sda* files are not
15 matches
Mail list logo
