[Beowulf] 96 Processors Under Your Desktop (fwd from brian-slashdotnews at hyperreal.org)
hahn at physics.mcmaster.ca
Mon Aug 30 15:14:01 PDT 2004
> Transmeta 2) This is not shared memory setup, but ethernet connected. So
yeah, just gigabit. that surprised me a bit, since I'd expect a trendy
product like this to want to be buzzword-compliant with IB.
> Does anyone have any idea haw the Efficeon's stack up against Opterons?
the numbers they give are 3Gflops (peak/theoretical) per CPU.
that's versus 4.8 for an opteron x50, or 10 gflops for a ppc970/2.5.
they mention 150 Gflops via linpack, which is about right, given
a 50% linpack "yield" as expected from a gigabit network.
remember that memory capacity and bandwidth are also low for a typical
HPC cluster. perhaps cache-friendly things like sequence-oriented bio stuff
would find this attractive, or montecarlo stuff that uses small models.
> A quad cpu opteron comes in at a similar price as Orion's 12 cpu unit,
> but the opeteon is a faster chips and has shared mem. The Orion DT-12
> lists a 16 Gflop linpack. Does anyone have quad Opteron linpack results?
for a fast-net cluster, linpack=.65*peak. for vector machines, it's closer
to 1.0; for gigabit .5 is not bad. for a quad, I'd expect a yield better
than a cluster, but not nearly as good as a vector-super. guess .8*2.4*2*4=
(the transmeta chip apparently does 2 flops/cycle like p4/k8, unlike
the 4/cycle for ia64 and ppc.)
I think the main appeal of this machine is tidiness/integration/support.
I don't see any justification for putting one beside your desk -
are there *any* desktop<=>cluster apps that need more than a single
for comparison, 18 Xserves would deliver the same gflops, dissipate
2-3x as much power, take up about twice the space.
personally, I think more chicks would dig a stack of Xserves ;)
More information about the Beowulf