Mini-ITX Clustering

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Thursday February 26, 2004 @06:59AM from the there's-no-i-in-team dept.

NormalVisual writes "Add this cluster to the list of fun stuff you can do with those tiny little Mini-ITX motherboards. I especially like the bit about the peak 200W power dissipation. Look Ma, no fans!! You may now begin with the obligatory Beowulf comments...."

16 of 348 comments (clear)

Imagine... by Chmarr · 2004-02-26 07:00 · Score: 5, Funny

... a beowulf cluster of obligatory beowulf cluster comments.
Floating point performance by October_30th · 2004-02-26 07:01 · Score: 5, Interesting

I thought about this some time ago.
I decided against a mini-ITX cluster because the floating point performance (why else would you build a cluster?) of VIA CPUs is just abyssmal.
Is there any reason why there are no P4 or AMD mini-ITX mobos around?

--
The owls are not what they seem
1. Re:Floating point performance by Short+Circuit · 2004-02-26 07:05 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Not to mention that mini-ITX is VIA-proprietary technology. At least, I think it is.
  
  And VIA markets their own line of CPUs for use in that scenario.
  
  However, I wouldn't mind seeing Pentium-M or mobile Athlons placed on mini-ITX boards.
  
  --
  tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
2. Re:Floating point performance by J3zmund · 2004-02-26 07:08 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  They might be on their way. Here's a 1.7 GHz Pentium M.
  
  --
  
  It's all Hood
3. Re:Floating point performance by -tji · 2004-02-26 07:12 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  There are P4 Mini-ITX systems available: Pentium 4
  
  But, most mini-itx systems are very small in size, and strive for quiet or silent operation. So, there are obvious problems with the P4's heat/power requirements. Perhaps a better solution is the Pentium-M in a mini-itx form factor. It has pretty good performance, at a low power/heat level: Pentium M. But, most of the Pentium-M boards are intended for industrial or OEM use, so they are hard to find in retail, and are pretty expensive.
4. Re:Floating point performance by mi · 2004-02-26 07:25 · Score: 5, Informative
  the floating point performance (why else would you build a cluster?)
  
  To crack encryption?
  
  To compile big projects?
  
  To compress huge files?
  
  The floating point is just a convenience. Almost any algorithm can be modified to work with fixed point precision -- and without loss of performance.
  Of course, many people will insist, they need FP to be able count dollars and cents -- they don't even think of counting cents (or any other fractions of the dollar) with integers, for example.
  These are, usually, the same people, who have troubles defining bit...
  --
  In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
5. Re:Floating point performance by steveha · 2004-02-26 07:41 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  the floating point performance [...] of VIA CPUs is just abyssmal.
  
  Older C3 cores run the FPU at half the clock rate. If you get the fanless 600 MHz EPIA motherboard, the FPU will be running at 300 MHz.
  
  The newer, Nehemiah core C3 chips run the FPU at full clock speed. Any C3 newer than Nehemiah should run the FPU at full speed.
  
  He used the VIA EPIA V8000A motherboard with an Eden core CPU. From what I found on google (here), the Eden core does run the FPU at full clock speed.
  
  In any event, he said the cluster has more processing power than a four-P4 SMP system, while taking less electricity to run. And it will be quieter and more reliable. I'd like to see actual benchmarks, but it seems like it makes enough sense.
  
  I read about a cluster of PocketPCs, and that didn't make practical sense. It was just a fun project.
  
  steveha
  
  --
  lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Seriously, though... by Short+Circuit · 2004-02-26 07:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

All things considered, what's the cost-per-tflop of that sort of system. These guys don't require as much cooling, space, or whatever else you care to think about.

Has anyone tried stuffing several into a single 1U chassis? For a sort of cluster of clusters?

--
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Imagine... by Anixamander · 2004-02-26 07:04 · Score: 5, Funny

...a new, original joke. Now imagine another one, because that last one wasn't that funny.

In fact, maybe you just aren't that funny. Except in Soviet Russia.

Shit, now I'm doing it.

--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
Some preliminary performance results by JimmyQS · 2004-02-26 07:06 · Score: 5, Informative

We studied 3 mini beowulf systems a while back, here at University of Central Florida, one of which was a mini-ITX beowulf. Here's some info and preliminary results: http://helios.engr.ucf.edu/beowulf/miniature.phtml
Hmmm by captain_craptacular · 2004-02-26 07:08 · Score: 5, Funny

There was no cutting or bending involved. All metal bits were simply cut, drilled, and bolted together using 4-40 hardware.

So what was it? No cutting, or cutting?

--
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
slashdotted already? by cetan · 2004-02-26 07:14 · Score: 5, Informative

sheesh that didn't take long.

I managed to get it mirrored here:
page 1:
http://www.phule.net/mirrors/mini-itx-cluster.html
page 2:
http://www.phule.net/mirrors/mini-itx-cluster2.htm l
page 3:
http://www.phule.net/mirrors/mini-itx-cluster3.htm l

--
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
Re:FLASH... by technomancerX · 2004-02-26 07:16 · Score: 5, Interesting

"He's using flash as the HD for the computing nodes"
Actually, he's not. IBM Micro Drives are not CF, they just have a CF form factor/interface to be compatible with hand held devices. They are hard drives.

--
.technomancer
Re:Inexpensive for testing purposes, by addaon · 2004-02-26 07:24 · Score: 5, Interesting

I agree, but that's actually a very interesting use. It also lets you play around with network topologies, and interconnects, and such. And of course, these boards do have one PCI slot, as well as the standard assortment of serial and parallel, so the hardware people can have fun too. For real number crunching? Not a chance. For doing a $2000 prototype, in 15 nodes, of a $50000 50-node cluster? I can't really think of a more flexible, more convenient, or more affordable option. For doing a $1000, 6-node flexible network simulator, purely for education? Also more than worth it, with few other options around.

--

I've had this sig for three days.
Sounds Fun by RAMMS+EIN · 2004-02-26 07:28 · Score: 5, Interesting

I have been thinking about this lately. I get disgusted by the fanns everywhere (especially since the one in my laptop makes an awful amount of noise sometimes and still doesn't prevent the beast from overheating and shutting down). Aside from being noisy, computers have way more CPU power than I need, and cost more than I am willing to spend. And they suck up a lot of power. (Some might add that they take a lot of space.)

I think all of these could be solved at once. What if someone built low-power, low-noise, and low-cost computer, good enough for running light office applications? I don't mean OpenOffice, but rather lightweight programs that implement the functionality people use _without_ the bloat. My 486 handles email just fine and the WYSIWYG word processors were once satisfied with a first-generation Pentium (and even these were already bloated).

Current PDAs have more than enough processing power to handle those tasks, and I've noticed that company's like gumstix build and sell devices almost like what I have in mind (the gumstix don't seem to have display connectors, though). Hey, these machines could actually be portable and have a really decent battery life (more than a full working day); that would be a killer!

Am I just daydreaming here or are others with me? Maybe you know of devices that do this job? Someone recommended Sharp's Zaurus, which is excellent, but still rather more expensive than what I have in mind.

--
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Re:Inexpensive for testing purposes, by jepaton · 2004-02-26 07:33 · Score: 5, Informative

A beowolf of mini-itx boards is probably the cheapest way to get bragging rights. As a practical way of fast and cheap parallel computation they are not.
However, I have purchased three (V10000 boards) thus far and intend to add more to my network as low power (as in Watts) servers.
I worked out that given the power of 10.78W (source: mini-itx.com's power comparison tool) for the V series (probably the one with the slowest CPU in the series, board only), I could save a fortune on electricity compared to a more regular computer.
The electricity company sells electricity at the rate of 0.63 ($1.18) per watt per year. Compared with a standard PC of 100W, I can regain the purchase costs (in savings) of the board and memory within two to three years.
Also, I found rack mount chassis available cheaper than one for a regular sized case. This influenced my decision a little - who doesn't want a network of rack mounted computers?
Overall, because of the low price and low power the mini-itx boards are a no brainer if and only if the CPU power of each computer isn't important.
Jonathan