[Beowulf] CCL:Opteron or Nocona ? (fwd from cavallo@chemistry.unina.it)
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.
Stuart Midgley stuart.midgley at anu.edu.auSat May 7 20:02:36 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] CCL:Opteron or Nocona ? (fwd from cavallo@chemistry.unina.it)
- Next message: [Beowulf] Latency Sensitive Algorithms
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Morning It highly depends on your code and whether you are going to run more than a single cpu in a box. If you are only going to purchase single cpu boxes, I think they are more or less the same. If, however, you are going to run more than a single cpu box, I think it is fair to say, that the Opterons should give better performance. Just look at the spec rate fp base and you will see that a dual processor opteron system out perform the Nocona systems by a long way. Each opteron chip has its own memory controller. So, if you have 2 cpu's, you have 2 memory controllers and your memory bandwidth scales linearly. Nocona chips sit on a bus with a single memory controller. If you have 2 cpu's you still only have 1 memory controller, so each chip, on average, sees only 1/2 the memory bandwidth. The other issue is memory latency. Because the Opterons have the memory controller on the actual cpu chip, their latency to memory is very very low, which gives an effective increase in memory bandwidth. The Nocona chips have the memory controller off chip, so their latency is high, reducing effective memory bandwidth. There are other minor difference, but the memory sub-system is the one that gives the biggest performance difference. Stu. On 08/05/2005, at 3:23, Eugen Leitl wrote: > ----- Forwarded message from Luigi Cavallo > <cavallo at chemistry.unina.it> ----- > > From: Luigi Cavallo <cavallo at chemistry.unina.it> > Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 09:19:33 +0200 (MET DST) > To: chemistry at ccl.net > Subject: CCL:Opteron or Nocona ? > > > Hi, > > we are going to invest some money for a few computers, and we have to > make a decision between the AMD-Opterons and the Intel-Nocona. What's > better ? We are experienced with the Opterons, but we have no idea > about > the Noconas... > > Major codes to run on them will be classical QM packages as ADF, > G03, TM, > some AIMD as CPMD, and possibly some classical MD as gromacs. > > Thanks, > Luigi > > > -- <---------------------------------------------------------------------> Dr Stuart Midgley | stuart.midgley at anu.edu.au Supercomputer Facility | sdm900 at gmail.com Leonard Huxley Building 56 | +61 (0)2 6125 5988 Work Australian National University | +61 (0)2 6125 8199 Fax CANBERRA ACT 0200 | +61 (0)4 1125 2488 Mob
- Previous message: [Beowulf] CCL:Opteron or Nocona ? (fwd from cavallo@chemistry.unina.it)
- Next message: [Beowulf] Latency Sensitive Algorithms
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
