Must be a dual , 2 x 4 physical cores each running 2 threads (HT), so 16 logical CPUs, requiring about 50k sec per workunit, so crunching stuff worth more than 6000 credits per day. It's in the same league as perhaps current Core2 Quad cores at 3 GHz, right? (!!!) Note it's running on Windows when comparing it to other hosts.
What a nice piece of silicon...Where can I apply to beta test for Intel :-) ??
Must be a dual , 2 x 4 physical cores each running 2 threads (HT), so 16 logical CPUs, requiring about 50k sec per workunit, so crunching stuff worth more than 6000 credits per day. It's in the same league as perhaps current Core2 Quad cores at 3 GHz, right? (!!!) Note it's running on Windows when comparing it to other hosts.
What a nice piece of silicon...Where can I apply to beta test for Intel :-) ??
But as I said: The Nehalem is running on Windows, and the Windows app is not (yet) as well optimized as the Darwin app. I really doubt that the 8 x 3 GHz would have a chance against the Nehalem I quoted on a level playing field.
I have a modest 2 core AMD Opteron 1210 running 6 BOINC projects on Linux at 1.8 GHz meeting all deadlines. I have one WU in pending credit in Einstein and six in SETI, including an Astropulse WU which took 115 CPU hours. I leave all racing to ATLAS and similar big iron.
Tullio
Nice one, that would be a 4 x 6 cores (Dunnington) host then, right?
CU
Bikeman
I assume your conclusions are next to the mark, but I can only speculate.
The rig was so unusual I thought it to be of interest.
Perhaps, from next year, the Nehalem CPUs on offer, in Xeon class, will look similar. I am thinking of the dual CPU octacore, with HT, that is rumoured to be around.
Shih-Tzu are clever, cuddly, playful and rule!! Jack Russell are feisty!
Hi! Just found this
)
Hi!
Just found this one.
Must be a dual , 2 x 4 physical cores each running 2 threads (HT), so 16 logical CPUs, requiring about 50k sec per workunit, so crunching stuff worth more than 6000 credits per day. It's in the same league as perhaps current Core2 Quad cores at 3 GHz, right? (!!!) Note it's running on Windows when comparing it to other hosts.
What a nice piece of silicon...Where can I apply to beta test for Intel :-) ??
CU
Bikeman
RE: Hi! Just found this
)
Bikeman,
want to see some REALLY fast computers? Try this one: MacPro 8x3.2GHz (2xQuad-Core) Xeons
Or this one: MacPro 8x3.0GHz (2xQuad-Core) Xeons
RE: Bikeman, want to see
)
But as I said: The Nehalem is running on Windows, and the Windows app is not (yet) as well optimized as the Darwin app. I really doubt that the 8 x 3 GHz would have a chance against the Nehalem I quoted on a level playing field.
CU
Bikeman
I have a modest 2 core AMD
)
I have a modest 2 core AMD Opteron 1210 running 6 BOINC projects on Linux at 1.8 GHz meeting all deadlines. I have one WU in pending credit in Einstein and six in SETI, including an Astropulse WU which took 115 CPU hours. I leave all racing to ATLAS and similar big iron.
Tullio
RE: Bikeman, want to see
)
It's amazing. Both hosts are in the range between 20 and 25ksec per S5R4-(!)-unit. I was in that range only in the end of S5R3...
Although this multi-core/CPU
)
Although this multi-core/CPU rig is on another project, look at it!
Shih-Tzu are clever, cuddly, playful and rule!! Jack Russell are feisty!
RE: Although this
)
Nice one, that would be a 4 x 6 cores (Dunnington) host then, right?
CU
Bikeman
RE: RE: Although this
)
I assume your conclusions are next to the mark, but I can only speculate.
The rig was so unusual I thought it to be of interest.
Perhaps, from next year, the Nehalem CPUs on offer, in Xeon class, will look similar. I am thinking of the dual CPU octacore, with HT, that is rumoured to be around.
Shih-Tzu are clever, cuddly, playful and rule!! Jack Russell are feisty!