Slashdot Mirror


Los Alamos to Use AMD's Opteron in Linux Clusters

nuke-alwin writes "eWeek is reporting that Los Alamos National Laboratory announced it will use more than 3,300 Opteron chips in two of its Linux clusters. According to the article 'The key to Opteron, as it tries to gain traction not only against Intel Corp.'s 64-bit Itanium chip but also its 32-bit Xeon offerings, is its ability to run both 32-bit and 64-bit applications equally well.'"

58 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. The key by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Informative
    Not only can the Opteron power both 32-bit and 64-bit, but it also performs just as well as the Itanium in either environment. The Opteron is also far cheaper (especially when you compare the costs of 3,000 Opterons to 3,000 Itaniums, as most potential customers will).

    Intel can't compete with the Opteron on merits alone. It will be interesting to see what they try next.

    1. Re:The key by Jason1729 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It will be interesting to see what they try next.

      Maybe claim that since they created the x86 platform, the Opteron contains their IP and any Opteron users owe them $750/CPU in licensing.

      Jason
      ProfQuotes

    2. Re:The key by jerkychew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But Intel has something in the server market that AMD doesn't: a reputation. AMD is just breaking into this market, and we'll see how many companies jump on the bandwagon this early.

      I've worked for enough good-sized companied to know that a difference of a few thousand (even a few hundred-thousand) dollars isn't as important as reliability when you get into enterprise-level systems. The old saying, 'nobody ever got fired for buying IBM', rings true for Intel as well.

      Not to mention that Intel's profit margin is HUGE when it comes to the server market - such is the luxury of being the only x86 gig in town. Intel can stand to slash prices dramatically and still turn a profit. Remember how they almost bankrupted AMD a few years back when AMD promised its 6x86 chips would always be 25% cheaper than a comparable Pentium.

      Yeah, this will be very interesting.

    3. Re:The key by javiercero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      " The old saying, 'nobody ever got fired for buying IBM', rings true for Intel as well."

      Are you for real? LOL, Intel entry in the server market was as cheap low end, nothing to do with "reliabitlity" or anything. All that intel has in corporate accounts is: well we are cheaper than sun. Now there is someone saying, well we're cheaper than Sun AND Intel. Intel is SOL, this whole new representation of Intel as quality server stuff is laughable. LOL!

    4. Re:The key by binaryDigit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not only can the Opteron power both 32-bit and 64-bit, but it also performs just as well as the Itanium in either environment.

      Oh really, the Opteron performs just as well with natively compiled 64bit apps? Do you have links to 64bit benchmarks that show this. Everything I've seen shows I2 ahead in integer performance and way ahead in floating point. Don't know if the Opteron #'s are for "native" 64bit code though (and what difference it would make if it were, but it's still nice to do a apples/apples comparison).

    5. Re:The key by jerkychew · · Score: 3, Funny

      Have you ever had to design a Windows-based network from scratch? Have you ever had your boss come to you and tell you you have $100K to spend? I have.

      No, it's not Sun. That's why I said in my original post that Intel is the only gig in town for x86, not for all servers. But, guess what? Not everyone wants a Sun solution. Tell me how you're going to build an IIS server farm on Sun machinery. I'd love to hear your solution.

      Go price out an eight-way Dell 8450 server. Then tell me about low-end.

    6. Re:The key by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel is trying to move into the space where you have powerful central computers. AMD will sell nicely into the cluster market, which sells more parts at a lower cost per part. After all, if an individual machine fizzles, you don't lose all that much compute time. This will give AMD a chance to build more of a positive reputation in the post-K6 age. :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:The key by evilviper · · Score: 4, Interesting
      But Intel has something in the server market that AMD doesn't: a reputation.

      And what do you think a reputation really counts for exactly??? Especially in the "commodity hardware" market?

      Intel's specs can't come anywhere close to AMD in ANYTHING. AMD has Intel beat in: price, performance, heat, power, maximum operating temperatures, and (lower) heat output.

      we'll see how many companies jump on the bandwagon this early.

      Lots of companies jumped on the Linux bandwagon quickly, and the operating system is really more crucial than the hardware. If companies can make that switch, a little jump to Opteron is nothing.

      I've worked for enough good-sized companied to know that a difference of a few thousand (even a few hundred-thousand) dollars isn't as important as reliability when you get into enterprise-level systems.

      Really? First of all, what evidence do you have that AMD is ANY less reliable than Intel? Secondly, the reliability of an individual component isn't anywhere near as important in a cluster... If it was, you wouldn't see even Intel processors being used, you'd only see Alphas, PPCs, Sparcs, etc.

      Besides, I would hardly call just about ANY x86 system an "enterprise-level" system.

      Not to mention that Intel's profit margin is HUGE when it comes to the server market

      What does that have to do with anything? Not like your enterprise is going to care which company is making more money. Intel can't take enough of a loss for a long period of time to be competitive with AMD.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:The key by Dub+Kat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      quote:
      I've worked for enough good-sized companied to know that a difference of a few thousand (even a few hundred-thousand) dollars isn't as important as reliability when you get into enterprise-level systems. The old saying, 'nobody ever got fired for buying IBM', rings true for Intel as well.

      This is definitely right, but I wonder if the name-brand is worth it if they're paying twice the amount for Intel vs. AMD.

      The article says Linux Networx got the contract for just under $10 million, and will deliver 2816 Opterons.

      Now, I've no idea how much the hardware costs them, but let's assume $8 million; the other $2 million goes towards salaries/profit.

      $8 million / 2816 Opterons = $2850.91 per Opteron.

      Compare that to the PowerEdge 3250 (Itanium) from Dell: $6229 per Itanium.

      I'm sure Intel has quite a mark-up on Itaniums and could get the price lower when trying to win a contract, but AMD is in the same position with the Opteron as well.

      Either way, a nice win for AMD, as it seems that the Opteron really is the best x86 processor at the moment.

      Colocated Linux Server - $60/mo

    9. Re:The key by javiercero · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Who in their right mind implements an IIS farm, and spends $100K to boot, jeezus!

      "Go price out an eight-way Dell 8450 server. Then tell me about low-end."

      Go and price a nice sun fire, or a nice IBM regatta and get back to us kid. Yes those Dells are low end in the realm of servers....

    10. Re:The key by Fallen_Knight · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think the problem ther is that your going to use IIS....

    11. Re:The key by zealot · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel's specs can't come anywhere close to AMD in ANYTHING. AMD has Intel beat in: price, performance, heat, power, maximum operating temperatures, and (lower) heat output.

      Not true. The opteron's pricing is similar to the xeons (depends which model you're comparing to (mp, dp, regular)). The performance benchmarks go back and forth, with the opteron generally leading in multiprocessor configurations. The power dissipation is a flat out win for opteron.

      Not like your enterprise is going to care which company is making more money.

      Companies will care. They need suppliers that have the cash to remain around to give support and take responsibility for problems. Sure x86-64, wave of the future... unless it dies with AMD a year from now.

      Intel can't take enough of a loss for a long period of time to be competitive with AMD.

      Not sure what this means exactly, but Intel so far isn't losing anything. They're still profitable (in fact, I've read that they've been profitable every single quarter since they went public 20-30 years ago). And for many quarters in a row AMD has been losing money.

      The hammer chips are nice, but so far they're don't kill Intel in performance, they're just competitive. And while they have potential to do more, it hasn't been realized yet except in certain niche markets.

      As you mention, there's more than performance (like power consumption), but it's still all wait and see... what will Intel bring out next, how well will AMD be able to supply chips and rally support?

      --
      He said, "You'll be able to tell your grandchildren that you helped assemble the first NT supercomputer," and I cringed.
    12. Re:The key by MoThugz · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Have you ever had to design a Windows-based network from scratch? Have you ever had your boss come to you and tell you you have $100K to spend? I have.


      Hate to break it to you but most corporate networks are built from scratch if you're expanding to new physical locations. Well, if you're actually serious about your question, then I'd say yes... in fact this year alone I've done roughly 6 such projects and with budgets ranging from (approx) US$50k to a cool mil.

      To go really low-end then build your own damn servers dammit... heck some of the custom servers we've built are at least at par with the 8450, if not better. 2U and/or 3U casings are not that expensive nowadays.

      Well anyway, if IIS server farms (wtf?!) are your "thing"... there is still AMD... and don't tell me your "IIS server farm" (which of course implies Windows 2000) which costs under 100k runs Xeons?

      Man if I'm the one in charge of whatever it is you've done... I'd fire your ass and kill that asshole of a boss of yours.
    13. Re:The key by evilviper · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The opteron's pricing is similar to the xeons

      I really don't think you can compare an Opteron to a Xeon. Think Opteron v. Itanium.

      but Intel so far isn't losing anything. They're still profitable

      My point is that, on price, AMD's processors are far less expensive than Intel, while still being better than them in just about every way. For Intel to prevent Opteron systems from taking over the market, they are going to have to eat some of the cost of their own chips long enough to keep people from even thinking about using AMD products. As I said, I don't believe they have enough cash to make that happen... That means they either need to make a HUGE leap forward with their processors, and come out with something that is actually better than AMD has, or their market is going to quickly slide out from under them.

      The hammer chips are nice, but so far they're don't kill Intel in performance, they're just competitive.

      Again, you are comparing two entirely different product lines. I wouldn't expect the first few chips (that are almost completely redisigned) to come out and be completely competitive with old technology, established chips. It won't take long for prices to drop, performance to improve, etc., but don't expect everything from the very first of an entirely new processor line.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    14. Re:The key by arne · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not like your enterprise is going to care which company is making more money.

      Companies will care. They need suppliers that have the cash to remain around to give support and take responsibility for problems. Sure x86-64, wave of the future... unless it dies with AMD a year from now.


      The problem with x86-64 is compilers. Currently I gain a factor of 2-3 using intels compilers of gcc (and several other compilers I tried) in AMD hardware. And obviously Intel compilers are not available for x86-64.

      --
      Copyright 1998 arne Verbatim copying and distribution is permited as long as this message is preserved
  2. SCO will bill them for... by ihummel · · Score: 4, Funny

    $2,306,700 and that is if they order their SCO liscenses before mid-October. I wonder whether the state of Utah won't suffer an un-accounted for nuclear accident in close vicinity to SCO's offices.

  3. They didn't create x86.... by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 2, Informative

    IBM did that.

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    1. Re:They didn't create x86.... by Jason1729 · · Score: 2, Informative

      A quick websearch leads to a lot of different explainations for why IBM picked the 8088 over the 68000. Some of the reasons I just found are IBM having a large supply of the intel chips on hand, IBM having a pre-existing arrangement with intel where they gave intel rights to their bubble memory in exchange to rights to the 8088 (that doesn't make much sense), and 68000 required more expensive support hardware. I didn't find any sites mentioning my explaination, but that's what I read in the early 80's when it was happening.

      Jason
      ProfQuotes

  4. Lightning computer system from Linux Networx by Chyeburashka · · Score: 4, Informative
    Here is the LANL link to the story.

    Still plenty of floor space in the new building.

  5. After having received notice from SCO, by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 2, Funny

    That they were to pony up millions of $$$ for free software, Los Alamos has decided to change the mission.
    The new object of the project is precise targeting of the
    Manhatten Project II on SCO HQ so as to cause as little collateral damage to Utah residents.

    Remember, when you hear the siren, duck and cover.

    */waves buh bye to SCO/*

  6. The Real Story is Here by LuxuryYacht · · Score: 4, Informative


    Los Alamos to get Lightning computer system from Linux Networx

    LANL

    For more specific technical detail on the supercomputer Linux Networx is building for Los Alamos, go to
    LNXI Newsroom

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur
  7. Other Interesting Info by heli0 · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
  8. Re:32 bit swapping to 64bit by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Doesn't the 32 bit compatibility need a reboot to use, then another reboot back to 64?"

    Only if you are running Windows...

  9. Re:32 bit swapping to 64bit by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To my knowledge this is NOT the case. Now, it might be an issue with the OS that they are using (i.e. the OS might not be able to run 32bit applications in 64bit mode, and vice-versa).

    Sorry to be bringing up a MS product, but their new 64bit Windows will be able to run 32bit programs with in 64bit OS mode, but not 64bit programs in 32bit mode (at least from my current understanding of the new product line). However, there was some performance hits, at least at the time that I read about these features (a few months back), so it may or may not still be the case now.

    I am sure it won't be long for Linux to be able to run 32bit applications and 64bit applications within the 64bit OS version. Especially since MS figured out a way to do this, it shouldn't be too hard for Linux to be able to do so as well.

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  10. Re:/.ed at 11 comments... by ihummel · · Score: 2, Informative

    Alas that most websites don't set their servers up to survive a slashdotting. Perhaps the web would be a better place if they did.

  11. Errm... by pr0ntab · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, and you also need to reboot your Pentiums to run 16-bit code.

    It is just the state of a flag in a control register. In particular, see page 68 of
    AMD's Opteron System Programming Guide.

    64-bit mode is enabled with the flip of bit 8 of the EFER Model-Specific Register. Otherwise it defaults to 32-bit mode. OS designers should test/set this bit just before running a thread in the scheduler, or jumping into system code as it can only be modified by code running in ring 0. This is the same way people treated the Virtual-8086 (16-bit) mode bit in CR0. In fact, you can combine the protected-mode, virtual-8086 mode, and "long mode" bits to have a variety of register-size and memory addressing modes per thread.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
  12. Re:Chinese and Los Alamos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't understand why it received *interesting* rating. This is more of a flamebate.

    First, Intel makes their chips where it is the cheapst. Pentium was designed from a group in Isreal. Consider the history of Isreal collabrating with Jews in US spying and steal info out of US military and companies, would it be possible that the Isrealies gov might thought about pressure the researh group to put some special circuit into the chip so they can steal more US secrets. In addition, Intel regularly ship the material to overseas for final assemblies in places like Malay. Remember that IRS wanted 600mil from Intel because Intel ship material overseas for final assembly? The IRS considered it as not totally made in USA therefore they don't get the tax credit.

    Besides, if you look at motherboards, I can't find anyone making them from the US. The market is simply too compatitive. The labor along is too expesnive in US. Companies like Intel is a globalized company and they will ship stuff to where it is the cheapest. It is no better then AMD.

    Personally, I believe that Intel's marketing people and Berret need to get their heads out of their collective asses and quit telling people what they need and don't need. The current slogan at Intel is "One Generation Ahead". Well, it's time to put the slogan to practice and produce some 64bit chips that is backward comp. to the existing 32bit apps and beat everything that AMD can dream up.

  13. Re:32 bit swapping to 64bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is already possible gcc -m32|-m64; granted both the 32-bit and 64-bit libraries need to be available. 32/64-bit compatibility is supported in SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 (SLES8); and will be available in RHEL 3.0.

    Debian developers are also working on a port to Opteron that does/will support 64 bit Kernel with 32-bit and 64-bit compatibility.

  14. Re:Chinese and Los Alamos by heli0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    " It is well-known that the Opteron chips and mobos are manufactured in mainland China"

    Not according to AMD: AMD Opteron(TM) Processor
    All Opterons are made in Germany.

    The only two fabs they they have are Dresden, Germany(fab 30) and Austin, Texas(fab 25).

    --
    Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
  15. Re:Chinese and Los Alamos by Sokie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All the troll/flamebait moderators must be without power.

    Someone already pointed out that the Opeterons are fabricated at the Fab30 in Dresden. AFAIK, AMD has no fabs in China and I'm not aware that they even do assembly there.

    But the most farciful (Note to grammer Nazi's: Yes I did just make up that word.) statement is your post is this one:

    What would stop them from putting data-wrangling code into the Opteron chips?

    So even if the Opteron was fabbed in China, you think that the Chinese James Bond is just going to slip in an entirely new chip design into the assembly line and none of the automated or manual microscopic inspections each chip undergoes is going to notice that there are an extra 25,000 transistors over there and these other 30,000 transistors are in the wrong place?

    And as another person pointed out, Intel does very little manufactering in the USA these days. At least AMD has a fab in Texas. I couldn't find any info on Intel's fab locations quickly, but I don't recall that they have a large scale one in the USA anymore, but that's complete guestimating.

    You sound as bad as the lady at work that thinks buying Microsoft is her patriotic duty!

    --
    ------
    Where are the slash-groupies? I distinctly remember being promised slash-groupies!
  16. just toured Linux Networx today... wow by dougnaka · · Score: 4, Informative

    I saw quite a few of their new clusters ready to ship out. I had to constantly wipe the drool off my face while I watched them assemble 2GHZ dual Opteron boxes with 2GB RAM per processor. Their tech is impressive. They have their Ice Box control units and quite a bit of custom control/monitoring hardware that makes building your own cluster seem less advantageous.
    They boast #3 on the worlds fastest super computers, so questions about Linux on the "Enterprise" should be easily resolved.
    This Tom's hardware review of Opteron vs. Xeon is quite interesting to give a better feel for comparison to todays speeds.
    It will be nice when we have some numbers to compare Itanium II direct 64 bit to Opteron, although it doesn't seem much can save the Itanic IMHO.

    --
    My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
  17. The real key... by DeathPenguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is that AMD opened their platform well enough to the LinuxBIOS developers while Intel basically told them to screw off and live with EFI. Here is what Ron Minnich had to say earlier on the LinuxBIOS mailing list.

    1. Re:The real key... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Excellent point; it is 100% true that AMD cooperated with the LinuxBIOS developers but one might also say that the real key is that Eric Biederman (an LNXI developer) was the work horse behind making LinuxBIOS on Opteron a reality.
      BTW, most of the LinuxBIOS clusters that were mentioned in Ron Minnich's LinuxBIOS ML post are Linux Networx systems... emm gooood

  18. Re:How Many? by realdpk · · Score: 2, Funny

    "in two of its Linux clusters"

    "making it the largest Opteron system"

    Two is also greater than one. :)

  19. Al Gore never claimed he invented the Internet. by C3ntaur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What he *actually* said was, "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." Granted, it's debatable as to how much initiative he took in its creation, but he was in fact involved in legislation and funding that helped to shape it.

    Whenever I see this twisting of words and facts perpetuated, it reminds me of the fools who just can't say nuclear (it's "noo-clee-ar", not "noo-kyoo-lar", damn it!!!).

    --
    Loading...
    1. Re:Al Gore never claimed he invented the Internet. by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 3, Informative

      DARPA started the internet, and DARPA is funded as congress damn well pleases, and funds can be earmarked for certain projects. So yes, Al gore did have a role in creating the internet.

    2. Re:Al Gore never claimed he invented the Internet. by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      DARPA started the internet, and DARPA is funded as congress damn well pleases, and funds can be earmarked for certain projects. So yes, Al gore did have a role in creating the internet.

      DARPA was started in 1969, while Al Gore was a photographer in Vietnam. He had no role in funding DARPA/Internet at that time, obviously, and anything significantly after that time would not be considered origination. All that Algore created was a great running gag for late night TV.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    3. Re:Al Gore never claimed he invented the Internet. by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative
      and anything significantly after that time would not be considered origination. All that Algore created was a great running gag for late night TV.

      No, no. You are obviously missing some facts.

      Al Gore lead the process of allowing commercial interests to use the Internet... Previously, it had been non-profit use only. In that process, Gore is quite correct that he helped to create the (commercial) internet, and more specifically, the internet we know today. Without that change, there would be no Amazon, no Yahoo, no slashdot, and you would not have discs mailed to you that allow you to quickly connect... You would have to arrange for access through a university, or someplace similar.

      Al Gore's statements are quite correct, in context. It's only when taken out of context (which is what is happening constantly) that it becomes a gag.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  20. Re:Opteron, MADE IN MALASIA by aka1nas · · Score: 2, Informative

    The CPU packaging is done in Malaysia or Singapore, the actual dies themselves are all fabbed in Dresden, Germany.

  21. Re:G5 by Durandal64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's a little different, since the PowerPC spec was designed to be 64-bit from the start. The MPC74xx, PowerPC 75x, and 60x series utilized a 32-bit subset of the 64-bit spec. So everything you do with the 32-bit subset is valid with the 64-bit spec.

  22. Re:32 bit swapping to 64bit by evilviper · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I am sure it won't be long for Linux to be able to run 32bit applications and 64bit applications within the 64bit OS version

    Why would you even want to mix-and-match with Linux (or BSD)? With Windows just about all programs are propritary, so you have to run whatever you can get, but with Linux, you just have to recompile and get everything to 64-bit, no problem.

    Yes, I know some people run propritary Linux programs as well, but those are rare (and it's their own fault anyhow... *nag, nag, nag* )
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  23. Re:While it's nice to see the 264 OC'd win... by heli0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    " I want to know how much faster 64-bit native stuff will run vs. 32-bit stuff."

    Check it out:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/opteron-1 7.html

    Start there and read the next couple pages. Native 64-bit runs up to 30% faster.

    As far as 64-bit native q3a probably not until the end of the year when a more stable Win-64 build is available. Although there is already a Half-Life2 64-bit build running on Win-64 Alpha, which may lead to some leaked figures earlier.

    --
    Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
  24. Re:32 bit swapping to 64bit by Weirsbaski · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sorry to be bringing up a MS product, but their new 64bit Windows will be able to run 32bit programs with in 64bit OS mode, but not 64bit programs in 32bit mode (at least from my current understanding of the new product line).

    In Opteron, 64-bit apps cannot be run under a 32-bit OS. Opteron doesn't recognize code as being 64-bit code unless long-mode is enabled, and once long mode is enabled the OS must be 64-bit (because all switches to more privileged code also switch to 64-bit mode).

    Being able to run 32-bit apps under a 64-bit OS was one of the absolutely required features for Opteron, however.

    (yeah, I work at amd)

    --

    I am not a sig.
  25. PPC 970 by batura · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I read stories such as this, I really start to wonder what type of dumbfucks run IBM. By closing the hardware support for the 970, they've bascially prevented their chip from becoming a player in these massively parallel computing environments.

    Who wants to buy 3000 IBM or Apple branded boxes when you can get 64-bit Opterons with whatever box maker you want? Doesn't that make a lot more sense to the bottom line? The most annoying part is I am sure you are bound to using IBM service contracts as part of the deal.

  26. Re:SCO will bill them for.. by Netlink · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are buying the cluster from Linux Networx who are a Canopy Group company Like SCO. Perhaps Linux Networks customers are immune to the SCO claim. I think it would be interesting to ask them, and Canopy who obviously support the SCO claim.

  27. The Hegemony Is Broken by tgrasl · · Score: 2, Funny

    The age of WinTel ends, and the age of LinAMD begins

  28. Intel Screwed Up by Bruha · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I dont know who was asleep at the switch over in intel land but surely that guy is one job less after rejecting the idea to use the same backwards compatibility idea that made things so successful in the 16 bit to 32 bit switch all those years ago.

    Now I get to watch a chip company I've supported (AMD) for years finally succeed. I just hope they stand by and keep their good prices for performance and not start to charge more for their chips if they become top dog or at least get a lot closer to knocking Intel off their high horse.

    1. Re:Intel Screwed Up by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Huh?

      You still want to be using a CPU from the 70s for how much longer? You still desire 8 and 16 bit apps do you? You still run a.out binaries under linux?

      Granted, if you plan on using an Itanium on a Windows platform, you may have some creature comfort programs unavailable, but as for Linux and HPUX, everything you need is there. Also, backwards compatability with parisc 32 and 64 bit apps are available under HPUX. From http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/infolibrary/wh itepapers/archives/parisc.pdf :

      1)Execution without conversion With very few exceptions,HP-UX 11i and HP-UX 11.00 32-bit and 64-bit PA-RISC application binaries execute on HP-UX 11i Itanium systems automatically and transparently without modification or conversion .Binaries from earlier versions of HP-UX (HP-UX 10.20,10.10,etc.)qualify for Itanium compatibility if they are certified on HP-UX 11.00 or HP-UX 11i.

      2)Recompiling without modification With very few exceptions,HP-UX 11i and HP-UX 11.00 PA-RISC application source code can be recompiled without modification for native execution on HP-UX 11i Itanium systems.

      3)Data transfer without modification or conversion Existing PA-RISC data can be transferred and used without modification or conversion on Itanium HP-UX 11i systems.

      Oh, and with your Opteron, which compiler are you going to use to get performance anywhere near the performance of the Intel compiler for the Itanium? You know those spec numbers were most likely done with handcrafted assembler from AMD and unreproducable by you and me. I was able to measure _exactly_ the memory bandwidth of the Itanium as reported by Intel. And, yeah, its fast.
  29. Power consumption problem by DV · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of the very serious problem related to building
    Itanium clusters is their very high power
    consumption and the associated heat removal problem.
    It's okay for a few server in a room, but for
    cluster trying to pack boxes is a key point of the
    architecture. Apparently Opteron is not too bad
    since there are dual Opteron in 1U server format
    design commonly available, and it was overheating
    that would be known by now, but for the Itanium(2)
    cluster I know off, they never managed to get the
    full cluster running without bringing either the
    power supply down or the air conditionning down.

    Itanium 1 was notoriously power hungry and
    a common source of joke about this, Itanium 2 is
    certainly better in this respect, but the clock
    speed has been multiplied by nearly 3, I really
    doubt they could compensate the initial problem
    enough to get the new high speed chip to get back
    to a decent consumption.

    On the other hand Opteron seems quite better
    probably getting the benefit of all the power
    consumption research that AMD did during the 90's
    where AMD chip were at the time consuming significantly more than Intel equivalents.

    Now if someone has the time to make a search
    for the advertized power consumption of both chip
    that would be a really interesting post :-)

    Daniel

  30. RTFM by Chep · · Score: 2, Informative
    where the Fine Manual = The Athlon 64 and Opteron optimization guide (PDF from AMD).

    It's spelt out in full, page 225:

    Future processors with more or wider multipliers and adders will achieve better throughput using SSE and SSE2 instructions (Today's processors implement a 128-bit wide SSE or SSE2 operation as two 64-bit operations that are internally pipelined).

    (...)

    The SIMD instructions provide a theoretical single-precision peak throughput of two additions and two multiplications per clock cycle, whereas x87 instructions can only sustain one addition and one multiplication per clock cycle. The SSE2 and x87 double-precision peak throughput is the same, but SSE2 instructions provide better code density

    (emphasis mine)

    So, in other words:

    1. SSE is twice as fast as single-precision x87
    2. their initial implementation of SSE2 is actually just an implementation of the instruction set, the actual execution units are borrowed from the x87 and have the same throughput limitations
    3. if you are writing really large code, you might get some benefits from SSE2 because of L1 savings (but your case has to be pretty borderline for that to make a significant difference, or you have to be able to interleave a significant amount of integer code with your FP code that using SSE2 frees enough decoder bandwith).
    4. In the future, they might bother with spending more space for more double-precision FP units (I'd think that if they can sort out the manufacturing problems, and the HPC segment seems like the area they're selling to, then it may make sense to spend a few mm to double SSE2 performance. Depends on who actually buys Opterons once the software/OS front lines are settled)
    5. Today's AMD64 SSE2 performance in double-precision is not going to be leaps away from their x87 stuff (unlike the P4), but you have to remember that AMD's x87 is really good.
    6. Don't forget that in long mode, you have 16 128-bit registers, which may help your compiler make more out of SSE2/64 code than x87 code; some benchmarks with SSE/SSE2 enabled compilers would help clarifiy whether that's the case or not.
    So in short, yeah, they claim a somewhat faster SSE, but their SSE2 is mostly a "yep we can run that code too" item rather than "yep, we can run that code too, and faster to boot".
  31. NEWSFLASH by aurelian · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Nuclear weapons have already been developed, tested, and used. They worked. Lots of people died. So why exactly do we need to spend money and resources developing even more lethal versions?

    You call people naive and then refer to 'the supremacy of good over evil'.. think about it dumbass.

  32. Al Gore helped make the public utility. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2, Insightful


    That's right. In several email conversations, I questioned Vint Cerf about this, and he said that Al Gore was extremely important in making DarpaNet, a research tool at a U.S. government organization, into the Internet, a public utility available to all.

    DARPA is the U.S. government's violence research department. DARPA is devoted to finding more efficient ways to kill people. In the beginning of networking computers together, there was no intention of benefiting anyone.

    According to Mr. Cerf, Al Gore recognized the importance of a public computer network long before other public officials knew anything about computers, and made sure the public network had funding.

    Some have called Mr. Cerf, "The Father of the Internet", but, as his biography says, many people were involved. Mr. Gore was the main promoter, "father", of the public utility we now call the Internet.

  33. Al Gore helped make the public utility. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative


    Software failure: Slashdot's system posted my comment in the wrong position. Hopefully this will be posted as an answer to Jaysyn, under comment #6704329

    My comment: That's right. In several email conversations, I questioned Vint Cerf about this, and he said that Al Gore was extremely important in making DarpaNet, a research tool at a U.S. government organization, into the Internet, a public utility available to all.

    DARPA is the U.S. government's violence research department. DARPA is devoted to finding more efficient ways to kill people. In the beginning of networking computers together, there was no intention of benefiting anyone.

    According to Mr. Cerf, Al Gore recognized the importance of a public computer network long before other public officials knew anything about computers, and made sure the public network had funding.

    Some have called Mr. Cerf, "The Father of the Internet", but, as his biography says, many people were involved. Mr. Gore was the main promoter, "father", of the public utility we now call the Internet.

  34. National Dedicated Game Server Farm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    As a taxpayer, I demand that any spare computing power on government hardware be put to use for dedicated game server time.
    It's worth the security risk.
    My vote is for Halflife 2.

  35. Re:Wasteful by evilviper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not only do Intel P4 processors produce more heat, and use more energy for the same performance as their AMD counterparts, but Intel processors also have a lower operating threshold than similar-performing AMD processors, by about 20 degrees celsius.

    Let's review shall we?

    Intel P4: Runs Hotter, Can't handle high temperatures, more expensive.
    AMD: Runs cooler, Easilly handles much higher temperatures, and are far cheaper.

    So tell me again why anyone should buy from Intel.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  36. One way or another please by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Simulating nuclear weapons is a heck of a lot better than finding out 'the old way'. If we're going to HAVE nukes (and there's no turning back now, I'm afraid) we may as well have the right ones for the job. I'd rather have them develop 'right-size' weapons for the post-cold war era than use giant 1970's warheads on third-world dictators. I find it foolish to demand reductions in 'collateral damage' while simultaneously demanding limits on harmless weapons simulations aimed at reducing said damage.

    I'd rather have 20 very accurate, very small nukes in our arsenal than the thousands of ICBMs we have now, it would be just as effective a deterrent; getting there means money and (simulated) testing.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  37. AIST also going for Opteren Cluster by Junta · · Score: 2, Informative

    See link here

    This one is an IBM made one. Pretty interesting.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  38. Coals to Newcastle! by spineboy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Oh that's great, the scientists are putting 3000! AMD chips in the desert!. As if it wasn't already hot enough there already! They could move it to Chicago in the winter and raise the downtown temp to a balmy 80 F. Chicago, the windy city, has the proper amount of wind flow for over-clocking these babies.

    Fantasy time! If I worked in Los Alamos I would; 1 definately be in the lead in SET@home, and 2 My Quake FPS would be pretty good I suspect...
    later.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.