Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:32:46 08/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2003 at 08:46:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 28, 2003 at 19:12:52, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>But it's not more latency than you get *best case* when using a traditional SMP >>setup. So you can only gain, even with a "poor algorithm". > >If you compare an SMP xeon to a dual 486 you _also_ "win". And what is that supposed to demonstrate? >But my point was that with a NUMA architecture, you might win a lot less >than you could, if the algorithm doesn't take into account the specific >architectural issues with a NUMA machine. > >My point was, again, that you want most references from a CPU to go to its >local memory for max performance. It's an issue on _all_ NUMA-type machines. Of course I know that. My point is that with Opteron, even if you are accessing non-local memory *always*, you are not accessing it slower than you would with, say, a traditional SMP machine (2x Xeon, for instance). Of course you can do a lot better - all I'm saying is that there's no way you're going to be doing worse. Either way you win, even with a crappy NUMA algorithm.
This page took 0.05 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.