T'aint so bad now

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
No, chances are I'll be buying a dualie setup and check out how I can speed up these simulations, esp. if I start having to compare em to classically calculating eigen values. I mean if the A64 is much better tho, I may go with that.

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
It won't be. Simply because it is not multiprocessor capable.

I still say for the 3rd time, Itanium all the way. Up to 5 times stronger in FPU than Opterons.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/html/news.html" target="_new"><font color=red><b>Join the Tom's Hardware Guide Community Photo album, send us your pics!</font color=red></b></A>
 
What I meant towards Intel system upgrade performance was not towards the mainboard upgrading. I meant that the whole system, whenever upgrade on the Intel side, for P4s, will OFTEN offer so much more.
Consider that you have a Wilamette. You go to a 3.2GHZ, you double your speed, then you add a new PAT-enabled motherboard. THEN you add HyperThreading, a usable feature. Then you add 800MT. That alone means you just upgrade and got more than twice the performance. Do that in September and I garantee you will see tremendous performance, outstanding for the price.

nForce 2 btw does use a special optimized logic when using Dual Channel mode, and the extra performance doesn't come from having twice more bandwidth (it wouldn't make sense), but from a special logic in there. I recall Crashman had indicated what was done. That was responsible for the real performance yeild the nForce 2 had over the competition, and especially that it still holds the top position even against any other single-channel solutions from VIA.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/html/news.html" target="_new"><font color=red><b>Join the Tom's Hardware Guide Community Photo album, send us your pics!</font color=red></b></A>
 
If you have the money and are currently making your own code, then consider a dual Itanium/Madison 1.3Ghz system for FP-heavy code. Its SPEC_FP score, 1800, is way beyond anything the Opteron is able to conjure, and it might not be that much more expensive: $1200 each processor. <A HREF="http://www.hp.com" target="_new">http://www.hp.com</A> sells very reasonably-priced workstations that will suit your needs wonderfully right now. Opteron is certainly a worse alternative for you.

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
He said himself money is not an issue.

Now I would like to see how he will get out of this one, either by denial or ignoring it, like he did with each time I recommended an Itanium.
IMO it IS the right way.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/html/news.html" target="_new"><font color=red><b>Join the Tom's Hardware Guide Community Photo album, send us your pics!</font color=red></b></A>
 
IMO it IS the right way.
Click to expand...
Of course it is the right way. I know that. I just want to see if he can get out his "I love AMD" costume...

I would be delighted if money wasn't an issue and I had to get top FPU performance. I'd certainly get a dual 1.5Ghz 6MB Itanium with AGP slot and lots of memory...

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
I'm not sure at all. Using Win2003Server, you should be able to run all of them. I don't know with what speed, though. That's why I keep saying that we should get more Itanium reviews as workstations! Noone listens to me! :frown:

Well, anyway, I thought this was going to be a dedicated workstation. Itanium is probably not the best for normal gaming because it will only emulate 32 bit software and has performance that is comparable to a 1.5Ghz Xeon, I've heard. Actually, because most games will still be 32 bit well into 2004, maybe even 2005, Prescott is actually the top performer in those. Opteron doesn't do that great a job at running 32-bit software and loses compared to current Intel/AMD strictly-32-bit solutions.

Maybe you can get the workstation for the place in which you work and then get a normal, 32-bit much cheaper desktop for your home. That's what any reasonable person would do, within the power users of the scientific community. And if your simulations are REALLY demanding, they'll run for several days - and therefore having two computers is a must. I use a workstation too: it sometimes faces weeks and weeks of straight simulations. What would you do with your Office/gaming meanwhile? You said it yourself: you have a 3.06Ghz at work, and I presume you have an AMD system at home. So you already use more than one computer. And I presume most of your gaming is done at home (hm...), so you could get a good desktop for your home and a killer dual Itanium workstation for work.

You're not telling me that you need ultra-strong FP performance and a powerful multi-cpu machine just because you want to reduce a 15 or 20 minute simulation to a 4 or 5 minute one, right? There are needier people...

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
My computer at work has nothing to do with quantum- I'm working only over the summer creating a program to deal w/ real time data and the companies db and then options for reading it and whatnot (need to crete a historic database for instruments as well). So, everything would be done at home. So far my sims have taken several days, but then again, it forces one to optimize and think of new ways of efficiency to make it run faster. In 2 years I go off to college, so I'm not too sure it'd be the best investment to just leave an itanic workstation at my house w/o using it (plus, I probably won't be doing quantum sims for some time after).

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
so I'm not too sure it'd be the best investment to just leave an itanic workstation at my house w/o using it (plus, I probably won't be doing quantum sims for some time after).
Click to expand...
What did you call Itanium again?... :smile:

Anyway, on what computer do the sims take several days?... Is it a sub-2Ghz processor?... if so, I'd invest money to get a great/good desktop computer ASAP, with a 3+Ghz CPU and lots of system memory. There is nothing wrong at all with P4's FPU now! Things have changed. You could get a multi-processor Opteron, but unless you can guarantee that your code runs in a multithreaded way with great improvements, it might not be the best investment - for the same reason that makes Itanium look like overkill, for a 2-year max venture. Opteron does look more like your thing, though, if you were to go for a multi-processor system - if you really want to be playing games with it and so on. Itanium would run your simulations faster and your games slower than Opteron. Where do you get all that money, BTW?

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
Well look who your talking to!!!!! Someone that doesn't even have a clue of how to even put a roof over his head.

Yep, there's a lot of kids running around these forums with a lot of big opinions!!!.

Honey, what's that smell? Don't bother me now I'm working on my computer! OOPS!
 
? Right now I make $15/ hour, and that coupled with some money I have saved over the last 2 years will go for the comp. Face it, I'm 16, there's very little chance I'll be pulling enough to buy a house, food, and car.

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
I hope you saved a lot, if you want a multiprocessor system! You could give us your budget - if it helped to come to a conclusion... We can try to help. Your call.

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
Hey... we want to have fun too! :frown:
And don't read the second part of this post if you don't want to know about my opinion.

So <b>STOP READING NOW, FLAMETHROWER!</b> :smile:

Anyway, with that kind of budget, you're probably better off with a powerful dual-Xeon workstation - which'll run games peachy-keen and, if you consider the new 3.06Ghz, 1MB cache Xeons on a 8xAGP board, will probably run most things you throw at it faster than an equivalently-priced Opteron (you'll make a workstation out of Opteron, not a server. THG confirmed that Opteron is not that good a choice for workstations right now!). Also, bear in mind that the 244 is more expensive than even a 3.06Ghz 1MB L3 Xeon. Both will have to use ECC, though. Both can address more than 4GB memory. And no, the Xeon will not be weak in FP if you compile with ICC.

Besides, if you're only going to use this thing for the next 24 months, you might only see the true advantages of x86-64 by the end of that period! So going Opteron now would be a very lousy investment for you.

If you want cheaper, you can go with the 3.06Ghz, 512KB cache Xeon - it got a 30% or so discount today. With the leftover money, you can get as much memory as you can - but there is no way you'll be going beyond say, 3GB, 4GB or, best case scenario, 6GB system memory with this kind of budget. Might be less if you opt for Opteron. You must consider that typical Xeon boards have 6 memory slots and 2GB memory sticks are expensive as hell. 1GB ECC is already expensive enough!

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
 
I'll be buying this end of year, so we can still wait to see. What I meant about the 2 years is if I bought an Itanic workstation, I wouldn't have much use for it past the 2 years. Now if I buy a hammer or xeon system, yes, I will bring that to college (suppose I can carry it on me back and forgo the laptop....wait, I'll be out partying :tongue: ).

All the things I really like to do are either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom