another idea i have floating - with lower speed cpu's eg: 500mhz or even up to 1066mhz - cant you use 'normal' as you l1 cache??? surely that is good for data steaming eg: a 1GHz cpu with 1024MB l1 cache, a further 3GB running at 400MHz, attached to 4 sata 2 drives?
Peter St. John wrote:
Greg,Well that's fair of course, I should have said that 5GHz is an unachiveable upper bound for a sufficiently distributable application. If I wanted to add some huge number of integers, which can be generated by some simple formula in ranges at each node, then 10 500MHz machines generating ranges and then computing subtotals would be almost as fast as one 5GHz machine, but for any real apps we would not see such a gain. I'm sure I"m overoptimistic about the "embarassing parallelism" of my own app, but pretty much it's pretty embarassing I'm pretty sure :-) Got's to see.Peter
On 8/28/07, Greg Lindahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 01:28:39PM -0400, Peter St. John wrote:
> So max thruput would be 10x 500 MHz, sorta a 5GHz computer for
> $1600,
No, it's like 10 500 Mhz computers, and very unlike a 5 Ghz computer.
I know some marketing types, and even the CEO of Sun, likes to add up
Ghz. But it's silly to do so.
-- greg
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, [email protected]
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, [email protected]
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
