[Beowulf] Register article on Opteron - disagree
landman at scalableinformatics.com
Tue Nov 23 11:52:17 PST 2004
My bad... I jargoned, assuming that HT == HyperTransport. I don't hear
much talk about HT := hyperthreading anymore ...
Looking over the Nocona specs, I think the interesting processor will be
coming after it (due to north/south bridge issues). I could be wrong
about the performance/scalability of the chip.
Building bigger shared pipes runs you into contention and sharing limits
quickly (especially if the pipeline consumers can sink/source the entire
pipe throughput themselves). More (possibly slower) pipes reduces the
direct contention, though you have to deal with other issues (NUMA,
Sean Dilda wrote:
>On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 19:06, Greg Lindahl wrote:
>>On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:17:55AM -0500, Sean Dilda wrote:
>>>On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 00:57, Joe Landman wrote:
>>>> If a Nocona follow-on follows the design of the Opteron (IOMMU
>>>>and HT, among other things), then things could get quite interesting.
>>>I can't imagine why Intel would drop a feature (HT) to match Opteron.
>>AMD has Hyper Transport, Intel has Hyper Threading. The first gets you
>>better memory and I/O bandwidth, the second is the thing you turn off
>>in the BIOS to keep it from screwing up your MPI runs.
>Thanks. That was just a bad case of acronym-collision on my part.
>Sorry for the mistake.
>Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
>To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf