Nekochan Net

Official Chat Channel: #nekochan // irc.nekochan.net
It is currently Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:53 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts


Board index » SGI » SGI: Discussion

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Forum rules


Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 12 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | First unread post | Next topic 
Author Message
skywriter
Unread postPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:22 am
Posts: 3077
Location: living in a linux-blunderland
this would make a cool processor to base a future rackable* product on. i assume the memory channel would not be too crippling...

Image
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10407818-264.html

from now on, in my mind, if it isn't ccnuma; it's rackable.

_________________
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
Top
 Profile  
 
zmttoxics
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:11 am
Posts: 888
Coolthreads anyone...? :p

_________________
Stuff.
Top
 Profile  
 
Rhys
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 9:08 am
Posts: 117
Location: North Carolina
From what I see so far, this isn't that exciting. If its an Atom derivative, as many are speculating, that means its 32-bit... and who knows what this thing's floating-point and/or SIMD capabilities are. Also, doesn't using pure message-passing instead of cache coherence have problems?

I don't see anything here as exciting as, for instance, Tilera's chips.

_________________
iBook G4 1GHz "Kursk" (PPC)
Terian Tiger 4 "Vyasma" (Itanium)
Boring Homebuilt "Voronezh" (Athlon X2)
RS6000 7044-170 333MHz/1GB
Top
 Profile  
 
skywriter
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:22 am
Posts: 3077
Location: living in a linux-blunderland
Tilera's look interesting too. different solutions for different problems. octane III has a "tons of atom's" option too.

_________________
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
Top
 Profile  
 
SAQ
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:37 am
Posts: 5591
Location: Renton, WA
If they solve the memory contention issue it'll start to look like a small Connection Machine with slightly more powerful nodes.

The more things change...

[edit] Correction - it won't. It appears to just be either a SMP/semi-NUMA type of configuration of a whole bunch of low-end processors or a cluster-on-a-chip.

A CM-2 successor on a chip would be a neat device, though, and this is halfway there...

_________________
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Systems available for remote access on request.

:Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :PI: :O3x0: :ChallengeL: :O2000R: (single-CM)


Last edited by SAQ on Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:37 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
japes
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Posts: 606
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Rhys wrote:
From what I see so far, this isn't that exciting. If its an Atom derivative, as many are speculating, that means its 32-bit... and who knows what this thing's floating-point and/or SIMD capabilities are. Also, doesn't using pure message-passing instead of cache coherence have problems?

I don't see anything here as exciting as, for instance, Tilera's chips.


How does atom-derivative and 32-bit go together? I have two Atom-based mother boards right here, both are 64-bit capable. In fact, let me show you on my D945GCLF2 board, running Solaris, dual-core Atom w/HT:

Code:
tiny:~$ isainfo -kv
64-bit amd64 kernel modules

tiny:~$ isainfo -bv
64-bit amd64 applications
        ssse3 cx16 mon sse3 pause sse2 sse fxsr mmx cmov amd_sysc cx8 tsc fpu

tiny:~$ psrinfo -v
Status of virtual processor 0 as of: 12/03/2009 17:16:44
  on-line since 11/08/2009 23:48:56.
  The i386 processor operates at 1600 MHz,
        and has an i387 compatible floating point processor.
Status of virtual processor 1 as of: 12/03/2009 17:16:44
  on-line since 11/08/2009 23:48:59.
  The i386 processor operates at 1600 MHz,
        and has an i387 compatible floating point processor.
Status of virtual processor 2 as of: 12/03/2009 17:16:44
  on-line since 11/08/2009 23:48:59.
  The i386 processor operates at 1600 MHz,
        and has an i387 compatible floating point processor.
Status of virtual processor 3 as of: 12/03/2009 17:16:44
  on-line since 11/08/2009 23:48:59.
  The i386 processor operates at 1600 MHz,
        and has an i387 compatible floating point processor.

_________________
:O3000: :Fuel: :Octane: :Indigo: :Indigo: :Indigo: :O2: :1600SW: :Indigo2: :Indigo2: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :Indy: <--challenge S
Top
 Profile  
 
Rhys
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 9:08 am
Posts: 117
Location: North Carolina
The desktop-targeted Atoms are 64-bit, however the most commonly used ones (N270 and relatives) are not. The article says "lower-end Atom processors," which I assumed specifically meant the lower-end processors from the Atom line. I could be horribly wrong, and it could be calling all Atoms "lower-end." Who knows.

_________________
iBook G4 1GHz "Kursk" (PPC)
Terian Tiger 4 "Vyasma" (Itanium)
Boring Homebuilt "Voronezh" (Athlon X2)
RS6000 7044-170 333MHz/1GB
Top
 Profile  
 
japes
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:35 pm
Posts: 606
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Rhys wrote:
The article says "lower-end Atom processors," which I assumed specifically meant the lower-end processors from the Atom line.


Well I'll admit I didn't read the article before posting. I think they were calling the entire line lower-end. Besides, 64-bits comes in handy when you need to address the 64 GB max memory they claimed in the article.

Might be handy to have a little more memory, 1.333 gb/core is a little small.

_________________
:O3000: :Fuel: :Octane: :Indigo: :Indigo: :Indigo: :O2: :1600SW: :Indigo2: :Indigo2: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :Indy: <--challenge S
Top
 Profile  
 
hamei
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Posts: 8457
japes wrote:
Well I'll admit I didn't read the article before posting. I think they were calling the entire line lower-end. Besides, 64-bits comes in handy when you need to address the 64 GB max memory they claimed in the article.

There was an article in the Inquirer ages ago about a 'sperimental SGI computer running hundreds ot Atom processors. This was back before the buyout ... Sounded interesting then, nice that it didn't die.

There's also some small place selling 8 and 16 core MIPS processors and mainboards for them for servers. Maybe it's time to re-animate that old argument with R-10 about how no one but Intel is big enough to develop processors these days :P

SGI, that powerhouse of imagination, coulda woulda shoulda. Where's that horse again ?
Top
 Profile  
 
Rhys
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 9:08 am
Posts: 117
Location: North Carolina
@Hamei: Are you referring to RMI Corporation? The XLP has 8 cores, 4 threads each at 2GHz. They just got bought out though, so we'll see if that all goes down the drain.

_________________
iBook G4 1GHz "Kursk" (PPC)
Terian Tiger 4 "Vyasma" (Itanium)
Boring Homebuilt "Voronezh" (Athlon X2)
RS6000 7044-170 333MHz/1GB
Top
 Profile  
 
SAQ
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:37 am
Posts: 5591
Location: Renton, WA
Now I'm confused. Originally I thought this was something that it wasn't, and now I'm still not completely sure after looking at the Intel stuff.

Is this a single-chip implementation of a massively parallel computer (such as the Cray T3) using lower end processors and interconnects that bring down latency, or is this something different? Is it designed to be used alone, used with a master processor (more in the Connection Machine style) or both? Or is this just a slightly improved Beowulf on a chip? (I know that Beowulf is a variant of massively parallel processing, but Beowulf:T3E is roughly like quad PPro:Challenge L. Some similarities, but not in the same league.

How is the memory attached?

_________________
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Systems available for remote access on request.

:Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :PI: :O3x0: :ChallengeL: :O2000R: (single-CM)
Top
 Profile  
 
skywriter
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:22 am
Posts: 3077
Location: living in a linux-blunderland
24 dual core atom-power processor with a 64GB/sec interconnect to one of four memory controllers that can address a total of 64GB of ram.

i wouldn't associate it with previous architectures as much as the natural evolution of x86 processors that have hit the useful clock frequency barrier. time to scale out rather than scale up as it were - adding more moderate clock rate cores/processors/threads to gain performance.

from now on the software really has to get smarter rather than just bloated :) at least as long as we're stuck with cmos.

_________________
:Skywriter:

DECUS Member 368596
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 12 posts ] 

Board index » SGI » SGI: Discussion

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group