Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:57:15 08/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 2000 at 15:57:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 18, 2000 at 13:38:28, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On August 18, 2000 at 07:20:20, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>[snip] >>>First of all a 64 cpu machine is like, let's guess: 50 million dollars? >> >>5 million, give or take a couple million. >> >>>So also in 9 years of time we can't afford that. >>> >>>Secondly a 64 processor alpha is perhaps not having shared memory, so getting >>>a good speedup is real tough then. >> >>It's SMP. > >is it SHARED or non shared memory? > >just that the processors are symmetrical multiprocessing is a bit >little info for me! > >>>But i think bigger hashtables are giving your goal quicker as you think. >> >>I was figuring 4 Gig ram per CPU. The memory bus on that machine is >>astonishing, also. > >aha so non shared. what is the latency of a message? >i calculated that a cluster with a 1usec latency of a message >is giving a speedup of less as root square. > >Obviously some techniques might be invented to get a better speedup >at clusters. > >I prefer a 4 processor at 10 Ghz in 2010 however over >a 256 processor of each 1 Ghz at a cluster. Here is the technical brief. Currently, 64 CPU models are only available in Beta. They will be released for sale to the general public in 2001. You can buy a 32 CPU version today. These 64 CPU's are not clustered. They are tied together with crossbar switches. You can take the 64 node boxes and cluster them together. I am not an expert on the technology, and the technical details are vague. http://www6.compaq.com/alphaserver/sc/sc_prod_profile.html
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.