Question computer recommendation

Jun 25, 2019
4
0
10
0
Hello. Hoping for some expert advice. I need a computer for running simulations. Most important is number of cores and clock speed. Number of cores is most important. I want to be able to run 96 simulations overnight (running simultaneously). I dont really care if it "overnight" is 12 or 14 hours, but I do need 96 runs (for example) so thats why I think clock speed isnt as important as number of cores for me. I dont care about graphics and tons of memory and flashy cases and things like that. I also dont mind if the cores are in different machines. For example if it is cheaper to have 2 computers 24 cores each that is fine.

So what and where can I find the best value deal for a machine with 48 cores and a decent clock speed? Would AMD instead of Intel be good enough? Any recomendations for specific configurations or sources would be greatly appreciated.
 

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator
Is your "96 simulations" done by having one program run 96 times or attempting to run 96 simultaneous instances of a program?
What benchmark performance data do you have?
Do you know how well the software scales on number of cores?
Have you attempted to run it on an AWS instance with 48 or more cores to verify that it scales to that large a host?
 
Jun 25, 2019
4
0
10
0
Read through this thread and follow the stylizing with a followup post with the necessary details on this thread. We can move forward from there.
Thanks Lutfig. Here is the info. Probably not a "typical" situation:
Approximate Purchase Date: ASAP

Budget Range: ~10K . . . but I want to save money anywhere I can . . . maybe the best $ per core ? Is that an OK way of looking at it?

System Usage from Most to Least Important: compute intensive simulations (sometimes days to complete)

Are you buying a monitor: No

Parts to Upgrade: All new system

Do you need to buy OS: Yes

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: no pref

Location: South Florida East Coast

Parts Preferences: no preference

Overclocking: Yes

SLI or Crossfire: Maybe

Your Monitor Resolution: not important to me

Additional Comments:

And Most Importantly, Why Are You Upgrading: all new system
 
Jun 25, 2019
4
0
10
0
Is your "96 simulations" done by having one program run 96 times or attempting to run 96 simultaneous instances of a program?
What benchmark performance data do you have?
Do you know how well the software scales on number of cores?
Have you attempted to run it on an AWS instance with 48 or more cores to verify that it scales to that large a host?
Thanks kanewolf. Answers follow.

  1. 96 separate independent instances of the app running simultaneously (not COM instantiated or anything like that). just like manually opening the app 96 times
  2. small scale testing on 6 core machine. done this before with a similar app in the past with a couple hundred cores with good success
  3. scales very well. no concerns there
  4. Cloud computing is not an option for me for various reasons. I am confident that it will scale to as many cores as I can afford, assuming the rest of the hardware supports the number of cores. The nature of what I am doing is that I can divide the simulations up on independent machines even if I want.
 

kanewolf

Titan
Moderator
Thanks kanewolf. Answers follow.

  1. 96 separate independent instances of the app running simultaneously (not COM instantiated or anything like that). just like manually opening the app 96 times
  2. small scale testing on 6 core machine. done this before with a similar app in the past with a couple hundred cores with good success
  3. scales very well. no concerns there
  4. Cloud computing is not an option for me for various reasons. I am confident that it will scale to as many cores as I can afford, assuming the rest of the hardware supports the number of cores. The nature of what I am doing is that I can divide the simulations up on independent machines even if I want.
I would recommend multiple smaller servers (16 core) because they will be cheaper, have higher clock speed and if one dies, you aren't 100% out of business.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY