Slashdot Mirror


Intel Announces New Enterprise Xeons, More Powerful Xeon Phi Cards

MojoKid writes "Intel announced a set of new enterprise products today aimed at furthering its strengths in the TOP500 supercomputing market. As of today, the Chinese Tiahne-2 supercomputer (aka Milky Way 2) is now the fastest supercomputer on the planet at roughly ~54PFLOPs. Intel is putting its own major push behind heterogeneous computing with the Tianhe-2. Each node contains two Ivy Bridge sockets and three Xeon Phi cards. Each node, therefore, contains 422.4GFLOP/s in Ivy Bridge performance — but 3.43TFLOPs/s worth of Xeon Phi. In addition, we'll see new Xeons based on this technology later this year, in the 22nm E5-2600 V2 family, with up to 12 cores. The new chips will be built on Ivy Bridge technology and will offer up to 12 cores / 24 threads. The new Xeons, however, aren't really the interesting part of the story. Today, Intel is adding cards to the current Xeon Phi lineup — the 7120P, 3120P, 3120A, and 5120D. The 3120P and 3120A are the same card — the 'P' is passively cooled, while the "A" integrates a fan. Both of these solutions have 57 CPUs and 6GB of RAM. Intel states that they offer ~1TFLOP of performance, which puts them on par with the 5110P that launched last year, but with slightly less memory and presumably a lower price point. At the top of the line, Intel is introducing the 7120P and 7120X — the 7120P comes with an integrated heat spreader, the 7120X doesn't. Clock speeds are higher on this card, it has 61 cores instead of 60, 16GB of GDDR5, and 352GBps of memory bandwidth. Customers who need lots of cores and not much RAM can opt for one of the cheaper 3100 cards, while the 7100 family allows for much greater data sets."

13 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. Programmers will be happy. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The x64 Phi cards are a lot easier to program then GPUs. No need to jump through hoops with memory mapping, keep things in sync for SIMD processing or worry about running out of stack space when doing recursion.

    1. Re:Programmers will be happy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you are an assembly junkie I guess you are right. But I rather prefer the implicitly vectorized CUDA programming model than having to use vector intrinsics by hand. If you want to avoid explicit data transfers take a look at (https://code.google.com/p/adsm/). Moreover, the performance of current Xeon Phi boards is not on par with Kepler GPUs. But, finally, NVIDIA is facing some competition.

    2. Re:Programmers will be happy. by dargaud · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    3. Re:Programmers will be happy. by pla · · Score: 2

      How does the performance measure up to GPUs for TFLOPS/$$$?

      If you need double precision FP, you don't have a lot of alternatives.

      If you only need single or half precision, the Radeon 7990 rates at 7x the TFlops for about 15% of the price.

    4. Re:Programmers will be happy. by JanneM · · Score: 2

      Here's a preliminary "best practice" guide: http://www.prace-project.eu/Best-Practice-Guide-Intel-Xeon-Phi-HTML?lang=en

      Seems OpenMP and openMPI are both available, so typical hybrid systems should at least run out of the box, though you'll of course need a fair bit of tuning to make full use of the thing. It should be less work than adapting a system for running on a GPU though.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:Programmers will be happy. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Nvidia had joined in supporting OpenCL so things were gonna be heading in that direction?

      That said its probably smart for Intel and AMD (who i read will soon have their hybrid X86/ARM and ARM+Radeon chips out) to concentrate on the server space as X86 chips have been so insanely powerful for the last several years the consumer and SMB markets has more power than they know what to do with. The simple fact is the software just hasn't kept up with the hardware so you have all these multicores just twiddling their thumbs, and why would you buy faster when you aren't even stressing the one you have now?

      At least in the server space those guys can always use more speed per watt and their programs aren't as single thread heavy as the consumer and SMB space is, so its a smart move.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Some SIMD required by Ottibus · · Score: 2

    You won't get full performance from a Xeon Phi without using the SIMD instructions, so it is not as easy to program as you might hope.

    1. Re:Some SIMD required by robthebloke · · Score: 2

      ispc, OpenCL, and LLVM on the way. Failing that, you could of course use C++ and AVX intrinsics (which would be a good choice if you already have a load of SSE4/AVX optimised code lying about).

    2. Re:Some SIMD required by robthebloke · · Score: 2

      struct vec3_FPU { float x, y, z; };
      struct vec3_SSE { __m128 x, y, z; };
      struct vec3_AVX { __m256 x, y, z; };
      struct vec3_PHI { __m512 x, y, z; };

      template<typename T>
      T add(const T& a, const T& b)
      {
      T r;
      r.x = add(a.x, b.x);
      r.y = add(a.y, b.y);
      r.z = add(a.z, b.z);
      return r;
      }

      Porting existing SSE4/AVX code to Phi is usually just a case of changing a typedef (or template type param), and overloading a bunch of low level functions (e.g. add, sub, etc). If it's not that simple for you, I'd suspect you may be doing it wrong. Porting from one to the other should only take a day or two at most.

  3. How many "Intel Inside" stickers on Tianhe-2? by elwinc · · Score: 4, Funny
    How many "Intel Inside" stickers will they be posting on Tianhe-2? I can see an a argument for a mere 16000 - one per node; 32000 - one per Ivy Bridge chip; and 80000 - one per Intel core carrying chip. But I think Intel's marketing dept should hold out for 3.12 million stickers - one per core!

    It's too bad Thinking Machines Incorporated never had a sticker policy, because the "Fat Tree" routing topology is straight out of TMI (the prior TMI topology, hypercube, didn't allow the customer as much choice to balance cores vs interconnect).

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  4. Re:Why bother? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2

    Here's a nickel, kid, go buy yourself a better OS.

    Here's the best part - after 'buying' that better OS, you'll still have the nickel!

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  5. It's a gas! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Xeon, Itanium. I think I've figured out the real genius at Intel.

    1. Pick a cool element.
    2. Remove a letter.
    3. ?????
    4. Profit!!!

    2015 Arbon
    2018 Heliu
    2023 Litium
    2024 Silion
    2026 Eon

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  6. Re:Xeon Phi=AltiVec? by elwinc · · Score: 2
    Nope.

    AltiVec was Motorola's 1999 SIMD instructions & hardware, a response to the SIMD instructions & hardware released by AMD in 1998 (AMD called theirs 3DNow!). Intel also released SIMD instructions & hardware in 1999, called SSE. 3DNow!, AltiVec & SSE were all 128 bit wide pipes that could handle 4 single precision floating point operations simultaneously in parallel. Some of them may have also been able to do two double precision floats also (not AltiVec though), and they all did various integer ops in parallel too.

    Xeon Phi is a chip that contains around 60 independent specialized Intel X86 cores, plus caches & ring busses for the cores to communicate with each other. The core count is inexact probably because Intel is figuring out the expected number of dead cores on a chip they can ship and still call it a complete chip. Each of the 60 or so specialized cores has a 512 bit wide pipe that will do 16 parallel single precision floating point operations or 8 parallel double precision floats. To call it a "pipe" means a new instruction & data can be issued every clock cycle, and there are a number of instructions "in flight" streaming down the pipeline, with results issuing out of the bottom of the pipe every clock. The pipe is a "fused multiply add" architecture (useful for vector dot products) so theoretically, every clock cycle, the CPU could issue 16 single precision mults and 16 single precision adds, a total of 32 flops per clock per core. Most high performance computing uses double precision, so cut that 32 in half, and multiply 16 flops per clock times 60 cores times about 1.2GHz to get about 1.2 DP teraflops (theoretical) per Xeon Phi chip. Actual flops will be considerably lower if the problem doesn't fit well in cache.

    The bottom half of this article has a nice overview of Xeon Phi specs.

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!