Re: comments about hardware
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 11:24 +0200, strawks wrote: > On jeu, 2005-07-21 at 21:50 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > It's almost the same, from what I've read. > > Here you can see the differences : > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13344 > http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/processorsmemory/0,39024015,39193811,00.htm cheers for those refs (although the former does seem to get a bit muddled when discussing 'main memory') > -- Michael Bane Atmospheric Physics Group University of Manchester -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
On jeu, 2005-07-21 at 21:50 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > It's almost the same, from what I've read. Here you can see the differences : http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13344 http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/processorsmemory/0,39024015,39193811,00.htm -- strawks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: comments about hardware
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 22:57 +0200, strawks wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 21:38 +0100, michael wrote: > > Well, I've Xeons in my box which support hyperthreading (HT). I presume > > this is the same as "dual core". However, with a 2.4 debian SMP kernel I > > found that for my applications it was better to turn HT off. I've yet to > > try with 2.6 kernel but it is meant to have better scheduling. But as > > implied above performance will depend on your applications! > > HT is not the same as dual core. HT simulate a dual core processor with > only 1 core and performance gain are relatively low. I suppose that > performance gain with a dual core are higher, but I never read anything > about it. It's almost the same, from what I've read. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety." or something like that Ben Franklin, maybe signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: comments about hardware
Hi, On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 21:38 +0100, michael wrote: > Well, I've Xeons in my box which support hyperthreading (HT). I presume > this is the same as "dual core". However, with a 2.4 debian SMP kernel I > found that for my applications it was better to turn HT off. I've yet to > try with 2.6 kernel but it is meant to have better scheduling. But as > implied above performance will depend on your applications! HT is not the same as dual core. HT simulate a dual core processor with only 1 core and performance gain are relatively low. I suppose that performance gain with a dual core are higher, but I never read anything about it. -- strawks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: comments about hardware
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 04:13:27PM -0400, Faheem Mitha wrote: > Thanks for the information. If you have experience of using dual core > processors with Debian, I'd be glad to hear of the details. I would be happy to try it out if someone bought me a machine with dual core cpu in it. :) All I have is a single Athlon64 server at work and my wife's athlon64 laptop (my own machine is an athlon 700 so not even 64bit at all). Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 16:13 -0400, Faheem Mitha wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > > One dual core opteron compared to two single core opterons: > > > Each opteron has a memory controller built in that does dual channel > > memory support. A dual core opteron still only has one memory > > controller and hypertransport to the chipset. The two cores share it, > > so two single cores have theoretically twice the memory bandwidth of a > > single dual core. Of course they also require a dual socket board > > rather than a single socket board, and you could put two dual core > > opterons in a dual board and get to use 4 cores total without having to > > pay for a much more expensive 4 socket board. Two cores in one package > > may on the other hand have faster access to each other's caches which > > may be an advantage in some situations, while in others sharing the > > memory bandwidth could hurt. At the same time the dual core would > > always have it's memory local, while two single cores half the ram is > > likely connected to the other cpu so access would have a 1 cycle penalty > > for access. A decent OS would try to make sure applications are running > > on the cpu whos ram they are currently in whenever possible. > > Hi, > > Thanks for the information. If you have experience of using dual core > processors with Debian, I'd be glad to hear of the details. Well, I've Xeons in my box which support hyperthreading (HT). I presume this is the same as "dual core". However, with a 2.4 debian SMP kernel I found that for my applications it was better to turn HT off. I've yet to try with 2.6 kernel but it is meant to have better scheduling. But as implied above performance will depend on your applications! Michael PS: I read a lot of 2.4.xxx and 2.6.yyy but was there ever a 2.5.zzz?! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Lennart Sorensen wrote: One dual core opteron compared to two single core opterons: Each opteron has a memory controller built in that does dual channel memory support. A dual core opteron still only has one memory controller and hypertransport to the chipset. The two cores share it, so two single cores have theoretically twice the memory bandwidth of a single dual core. Of course they also require a dual socket board rather than a single socket board, and you could put two dual core opterons in a dual board and get to use 4 cores total without having to pay for a much more expensive 4 socket board. Two cores in one package may on the other hand have faster access to each other's caches which may be an advantage in some situations, while in others sharing the memory bandwidth could hurt. At the same time the dual core would always have it's memory local, while two single cores half the ram is likely connected to the other cpu so access would have a 1 cycle penalty for access. A decent OS would try to make sure applications are running on the cpu whos ram they are currently in whenever possible. Hi, Thanks for the information. If you have experience of using dual core processors with Debian, I'd be glad to hear of the details. Best regards, Faheem. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 01:36:55AM -0400, Faheem Mitha wrote: > 1) Dual core Opterons first came on the market in April. The sales rep > said that AMD Dual Core Opterons did not work with Fedora Core. Since they > only install Fedora and SuSE, they had no info about Debian. Any idea what > the status is here? How well are they supported, and how stably do they > run under Linux? > > Also, I was told that a dual core Opteron, which is somewhat more than > twice the cost two regular Opterons of similar speed, is not equivalent to > two regular Opterons in functionality. Can anyone point me to information > about this, or offer a comment? One dual core opteron compared to two single core opterons: Each opteron has a memory controller built in that does dual channel memory support. A dual core opteron still only has one memory controller and hypertransport to the chipset. The two cores share it, so two single cores have theoretically twice the memory bandwidth of a single dual core. Of course they also require a dual socket board rather than a single socket board, and you could put two dual core opterons in a dual board and get to use 4 cores total without having to pay for a much more expensive 4 socket board. Two cores in one package may on the other hand have faster access to each other's caches which may be an advantage in some situations, while in others sharing the memory bandwidth could hurt. At the same time the dual core would always have it's memory local, while two single cores half the ram is likely connected to the other cpu so access would have a 1 cycle penalty for access. A decent OS would try to make sure applications are running on the cpu whos ram they are currently in whenever possible. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Ed Tomlinson wrote: Hi, Dual core support is not distro specific. It depends on the kernel used. I believe that debian, with a recent (2.6.12.3+) kernel should be fine. Do you have any personal experience in using this? I'm concerned about stability issues. Also, would there not be some practical difficulty in getting this installed, seeing as with an earlier kernel it probably won't boot, and the official Debian installers all use 2.6.8? Faheem. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: comments about hardware
Hi, Dual core support is not distro specific. It depends on the kernel used. I believe that debian, with a recent (2.6.12.3+) kernel should be fine. Ed Tomlinson On Monday 18 July 2005 01:36, Faheem Mitha wrote: > > Dear People, > > My bioinformatics research group at Duke is buying a server, which will > mostly be used as a server, particularly for web based services. The idea > here is that a user will submit a request for some bioinformatics > calculation via a web interface (often using Python or R or similar), the > server does the calculation, and returns it as a web page. > > None of us are experts about recent hardware, so would appreciate any > feedback about hardware specs. > > The following quote is from Monarch Computers. > > We plan to run Linux on this. It has not yet been decided yet what, but it > seems most likely that it will be either some Red Hat variant (Fedora > Core, CentOS), or Debian (possibly Ubuntu). > > Ok, so here are some specific questions. > > 1) Dual core Opterons first came on the market in April. The sales rep > said that AMD Dual Core Opterons did not work with Fedora Core. Since they > only install Fedora and SuSE, they had no info about Debian. Any idea what > the status is here? How well are they supported, and how stably do they > run under Linux? > > Also, I was told that a dual core Opteron, which is somewhat more than > twice the cost two regular Opterons of similar speed, is not equivalent to > two regular Opterons in functionality. Can anyone point me to information > about this, or offer a comment? > > 2) I'm wondering if the listed motherboard is the best choice. I see it > listed in > http://alioth.debian.org/docman/view.php/30192/27/mainboards.html > > We are looking for the motherboard that has the least known issues. > Preferably something that will work right out of the box. > > Google found me http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2004/09/msg00443.html > but would be interested in other reports. > > The specs are here > http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thunderk8spro_spec.html > > It looks like both the graphics card and the ethernet cards are onboard. > Looks like the graphics card is ATI RAGE XL PCI, which supposedly works > with the 'ati' driver. Is this under XFree 4.3? > > The ethernet cards are an Intel Ethernet Pro 100, which supposedly works > with the e100 driver and a Gigabit Broadcom which works with the tg3 > driver. There seem to be two cards here. Is that correct? > > I'm kinda allergic to onboard cards. They are often trouble. > > Has anyone had experience with Debian Sarge installation with this? Does > anyone have a board to suggest that they prefer to this? > > 3) I'm also wondering if peple have thoughts about the RAID setup. The rep > said he would be using RAID 1, but I see RAID 10 is listed. I'll have to > check on this. Anyway, assuming this corresponds to > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_10 > with each RAID 1 set as two drives, and 4 RAID 1 sets striped together, > does this seem reasonable? > > Thanks.Faheem. > > *** > ITEM NUM PRICE PER ITEM TOT > > Monarch Empro Custom 2U Rack S 1.0075.00 75.00 > > RMC2K2-9I-XPSS,2U,8 Bays,SATA, 1.00 725.00 725.00 > > AIC 2U Riser Card/Rear Window1.00 112.00 112.00 > > Tyan S2882G3NR-D Dual Socket94 1.00 394.00 394.00 > > Amd OSA265FAA6CB Dual Core Opt 2.00 851.00 1,702.00 > > Thermal Grease, Shin-Etsu G675 2.0014.0028.00 > > THERMALTAKE A1838 AMD Opteron2.0025.0050.00 > > WESTERN DIGITAL 250 GB 2500JD1.00 115.00 115.00 > > 3WARE Escalade 9500S-8 - 8-por 1.00 485.00 485.00 > > RAID 10 Setup1.0025.0025.00 > > WESTERN DIGITAL 250 GB 2500JD8.00115.00 920.00 > > SONY DWD-56A 8X4X2.4 DVD RW+/- 1.00129.00 129.00 > > SUSE Linux 9.3 Professional Ed 1.00 92.00 92.00 > > 24/7 TECH SUPPORT+ONSITE 3 YR. 1.00199.00 199.00 > > Net Order: 5,051.00 > Freight: 75.00 > 5,126.00 > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
