Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:26:44 09/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2003 at 18:08:40, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 02, 2003 at 00:14:02, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>On September 01, 2003 at 23:23:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 01, 2003 at 09:39:55, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>> >>>>Any large (multi-node) SMP machine will have the same problem as NUMA with >>>>respect to inter-node latency. SMP doesn't magically make node-to-node >>>>communication any faster. >>> >>>Actually it does. SMP means symmetric. >>> >>>NUMA is _not_ symmetric. >> >>Of course. The acronym means "non uniform memory access". >> >>But if you think "symmetric" necessarily means "faster", maybe you'd better look >>in a dictionary. > >You're wrong by a factor 2 or so in latency and up to factor 5 for 128 cpu's. Blah blah blah. I snipped the rest of your drivel. All I said is that being SMP doesn't magically make your latency better. It depends on how the machine is built. There's no reason a big NUMA machine couldn't be built where the average memory access wouldn't be as fast or faster than a similar-sized SMP machine. There are several reasons why such a machine isn't built, but not a real technical reason.
This page took 0.01 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.