"Paul Leventis (at home)" wrote:> > I agree. That's why my original posting makes reference to some SPEC > results showing that 64-bit code on Athlon64 is ~5% slower than the same > programs compiled in 32-bit code. One specific SPEC sub-component is a tool > called VPR, which is an academic place & route tool for FPGAs. It shows a > 8% slow-down. While by no means comprehensive, I think this gives an idea > of how much speed to expect out of 64-bit vs. 32-bit code, at least for now. > > I've forwarded your comments on how nice it would be to see some results for > different system configurations on to the relevant groups in Altera. My > personal experience (going from PII to PIII to P4) has been that SPEC2000 is > a pretty good proxy for Quartus performance, especially for place & route > limited designs.That is very interesting information. I was not aware of the AMD 64-bit code was running slower than 32-bit code. I am sure that you won't see much of that on the AMD web site. I may check in the PC building newsgroups to see what results they are finding. They seem to be a bunch that get to the skinny of things like this. -- Rick "rickman" Collins rick.collins@XYarius.com Ignore the reply address. To email me use the above address with the XY removed. Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company Specializing in DSP and FPGA design URL http://www.arius.com 4 King Ave 301-682-7772 Voice Frederick, MD 21701-3110 301-682-7666 FAX
Need to speed up Stratix compiles.
Started by ●February 27, 2004
Reply by ●March 4, 20042004-03-04
Reply by ●March 4, 20042004-03-04
hmurray@suespammers.org (Hal Murray) writes:> Last I checked, multiple PAR runs didn't gain much if you > had a well floor-planned system. That was a long time ago.True. If you don;t have a highly congested design with a high degree of utilization you will probably not gain that much. My point was that this was an example of a *very simple* parallelism done by Xilinx. It would be more optimal (and much more difficult) to make a parallel version of a single iteration of "par". Petter -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Reply by ●March 4, 20042004-03-04
On 04 Mar 2004 00:30:13 +0100, Petter Gustad wrote:>> The hyperthreaded Xeons run as two processors, so a quad Xeon board >> appears to a HT-aware OS as an 8-CPU system. > >Then you would call a system with single P4 with HyperThreading a dual >processor system as well then? This would be a little "unfair" when >comparing to a full dual-core CPU like the rumored UltraSparc-IV.Windows XP sees my dual-Xeon workstation as a quad CPU machine, so it can schedule four separate simultaneous threads. If it's behaving as a quad-processor, then I'm not sure what else I should call it.>> Why pay for all the extra high-end hardware in a top-end server if you >> don't need it? When I was last looking at building systems like this, > >My point was that you usually get lots of extra high-end hardware when >you buy large SMP systems, especially when you need to go beyond >4-way. Also, it's usually cheaper to get 4x4GB RAM rather than 16GB >RAM for a single MB (unless you have a large enough number of DIMM >slots).I agree, it's difficult to buy a ready-made high-end system that doesn't have redundant PSUs, hot-swap RAID etc. This is why I haven't bought off the shelf for over 5 years now, but buy the components I actually want and assemble it myself.>> about 18 months or so ago, a quad-Xeon mobo from Supermicro was >> <$2000, and the processors were around $450 apiece. > >This is pretty good, I was not aware of the low cost of the Supermicro >MB. You would end up at close to $4000, e.g. in the same ballpark as >buying 4 P4 systems. So if the application was performing better on >the SMP than on the to the cluster I would definitely go with the SMP.Bare high-end mobos are cheaper than most people think. At the time, I paid around $850 for a Supermicro P4DC6+ dual Xeon board, but I haven't looked at current prices. There is a hike when you want more than two physical processors, though - presumably due to low demand and less competition. The P4 Xeons are hugely cheaper than the PIII versions for some reason. If you're an AMD fan, then Tyan make nice multi-CPU boards at sensible prices. -- Max
Reply by ●March 4, 20042004-03-04
Max <mtj2@btopenworld.com> writes:> Windows XP sees my dual-Xeon workstation as a quad CPU machine, soI hardly ever use Windows so I haven't had a chance to observe this. I don't have a HT system at hand now, but what does grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo return on a Linux based HT system?> If you're an AMD fan, then Tyan make nice multi-CPU boards at > sensible prices.We have a small cluster of Quad Opterons at work. They give superb performance when I run Synopsys Design Compiler and similar tools. Unfortunately I can't run Quartus II (3.0) on these as I have mentioned earlier. Petter -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Reply by ●March 5, 20042004-03-05
On 04 Mar 2004 22:48:21 +0100, Petter Gustad wrote:>I hardly ever use Windows so I haven't had a chance to observe this. I >don't have a HT system at hand now, but what does > >grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo > >return on a Linux based HT system?Sorry, don't know from personal experience. I don't use Linux much, and when I do, I run it under VMware, which emulates a uniprocessor. I've heard from other users that Linux understands HT, but I don't know any more than that, really. I daresay the folks in some of the hardware groups could say more - try alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.supermicro -- Max
Reply by ●March 5, 20042004-03-05
Max <mtj2@btopenworld.com> writes:> On 04 Mar 2004 22:48:21 +0100, Petter Gustad wrote: > > >I hardly ever use Windows so I haven't had a chance to observe this. I > >don't have a HT system at hand now, but what does > > > >grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo > > > >return on a Linux based HT system? > > Sorry, don't know from personal experience. I don't use Linux much, > and when I do, I run it under VMware, which emulates a uniprocessor.I got the answer from a local Linux group. It appears as 4 processors: $ grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 processor : 1 processor : 2 processor : 3 So it will be difficult to distinglish between two physical CPU packages, dual-core and HT... Petter -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Reply by ●March 5, 20042004-03-05
Petter Gustad <newsmailcomp5@gustad.com> writes:> So it will be difficult to distinglish between two physical CPU > packages, dual-core and HT...I think you can look at the "flags": $ grep ^flags /proc/cpuinfo flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm This is on a uni-processor Xeon box. The "ht" flag might hint at hyperthreading, but I'm not sure...
