http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2010/07/the-new-amazon-ec2-instance-type-the-cluster-compute-instance.html

Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for $1.60/hour.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for 
> $1.60/hour.

That's *dual* quad-core (i.e., total of 8 cores), apparently.

What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a 
single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...

(The other problem, of course, is that although it has 1.5TB of storage, 
since you access the Internet at 8 mbit/sec, it would take a loooong 
time to fill or empty that space. So it's only useful for temporary data 
generated by the process itself.)

Post a reply to this message

On 7/13/2010 10:57 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>
>> Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for
>> $1.60/hour.
>
> That's *dual* quad-core (i.e., total of 8 cores), apparently.
>
> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...

Its a cluster .... there are 2 separate systems.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:57:21 +0100, Invisible wrote:

> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...

It's probably virtualized, which lets you configure any odd amount of 
memory you want, pretty much.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Le 13/07/2010 17:57, Invisible nous fit lire :
> Darren New wrote:
> 
>> Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for
>> $1.60/hour.
> 
> That's *dual* quad-core (i.e., total of 8 cores), apparently.
> 
> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...

Correct, 24GB of ram is more usual.
It might infact be a VM of 23GB... 1GB for the barebone.
Or a commercial cover-up, to avoid the issue of Gi/G, or whatever

24740416k is reported in system monitor of gnome as only 23.6GB, go figure.

Post a reply to this message

>> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
>> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...
> 
> It's probably virtualized, which lets you configure any odd amount of 
> memory you want, pretty much.

It *is* virtualised, but if the RAM doesn't physically reside on the 
same system, you're going to see a jaw-droppingly *vast* performance 
drop. (Which would kind of negate the whole point of those multiple CPU 
cores...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:23:53 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
>>> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...
>> 
>> It's probably virtualized, which lets you configure any odd amount of
>> memory you want, pretty much.
> 
> It *is* virtualised, but if the RAM doesn't physically reside on the
> same system, you're going to see a jaw-droppingly *vast* performance
> drop. (Which would kind of negate the whole point of those multiple CPU
> cores...)

Sure, but the system may well have 128 GB of memory installed in it (for 
example), and only 23 GB allocated to that specific machine - that's my 
point.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> 
>> Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for 
>> $1.60/hour.
> 
> That's *dual* quad-core (i.e., total of 8 cores), apparently.

I think it has a quad-core 2 hyperthreads per core. At least, according to 
the intel specs, if I read them right.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron wrote:
> It might infact be a VM of 23GB... 1GB for the barebone.

It's an amazon compute server you're renting by the hour. Yes, it's in a VM. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

>>>> What I can't figure out is how it's possible to put 23GB of RAM into a
>>>> single PC. AFAIK, nobody makes motherboard that can do that...
>>> It's probably virtualized, which lets you configure any odd amount of
>>> memory you want, pretty much.
>> It *is* virtualised, but if the RAM doesn't physically reside on the
>> same system, you're going to see a jaw-droppingly *vast* performance
>> drop. (Which would kind of negate the whole point of those multiple CPU
>> cores...)
> 
> Sure, but the system may well have 128 GB of memory installed in it (for 
> example), and only 23 GB allocated to that specific machine - that's my 
> point.

And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more 
than 16GB of RAM from?!"

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4c3d7119$1@news.povray.org...

> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more
> than 16GB of RAM from?!"

From computer stores, where else? However, 16 is an odd number in days of
tripple channel. Consumer/prosumer mb's typically will top out at 24GB
(single cpu) or 48GB (dual cpu).

Post a reply to this message

>> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more
>> than 16GB of RAM from?!"
> 
> From computer stores, where else? However, 16 is an odd number in days of
> tripple channel. Consumer/prosumer mb's typically will top out at 24GB
> (single cpu) or 48GB (dual cpu).

Most if not all the motherboards I've seen top out at 8GB, actually...

Post a reply to this message

> Most if not all the motherboards I've seen top out at 8GB, actually...

Odd, pretty much all the motherboards I looked at for a single Intel i7 
processor supported up to 24 GB.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more 
> than 16GB of RAM from?!"

http://tinyurl.com/25z4y9r

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:11:04 +0100, Invisible wrote:

>> Sure, but the system may well have 128 GB of memory installed in it
>> (for example), and only 23 GB allocated to that specific machine -
>> that's my point.
> 
> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more
> than 16GB of RAM from?!"

GIYF. ;-)

Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking 
very specialized hardware here.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking 
> very specialized hardware here.

So it's in the same category as "where do you buy s bus" then?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> very specialized hardware here.

Well, really, it's only "very specialized" if your business doesn't involve 
large-memory computing. That sort of stuff is pretty off-the-shelf if you're 
an engineering firm or a something like that.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:07:30 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> very specialized hardware here.
> 
> Well, really, it's only "very specialized" if your business doesn't
> involve large-memory computing. That sort of stuff is pretty
> off-the-shelf if you're an engineering firm or a something like that.

Well, yeah - but I'm not going to find it going to the local Best Buy, 
that's what I mean.  :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 18:02:04 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>> Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking
>> very specialized hardware here.
> 
> So it's in the same category as "where do you buy s bus" then?

Or "where would I buy a more powerful laser than the laser pointer I 
bought at Office Max"?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Well, yeah - but I'm not going to find it going to the local Best Buy, 
> that's what I mean.  :-)

It is indeed not a "Personal Computer" sort of thing. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:09:54 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Well, yeah - but I'm not going to find it going to the local Best Buy,
>> that's what I mean.  :-)
> 
> It is indeed not a "Personal Computer" sort of thing. :-)

Though it'd be nice to have one or three. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Though it'd be nice to have one or three. ;-)

I'll just rent em when I need em. :-)

It was funny, tho. I read someone talking about all the "nosql" databases, 
and how people were complaining SQL doesn't "scale".  He said "SQL scales 
fine. What the people mean is that SQL doesn't scale if you want to use a 
commodity piece of hardware like Amazon rents. This is what we have in my 
office for testing:" and gives the stats on a 96-CPU 256G RAM SQL processor. 
He says "That's the low-end base machine for testing, not the production 
system."

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On 14-7-2010 17:17, Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle 
>> more than 16GB of RAM from?!"
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/25z4y9r
> 
or e.g. http://www.sgi.com/pdfs/4185.pdf

Post a reply to this message

Le 14/07/2010 17:51, Jim Henderson nous fit lire :
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:11:04 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> 
>>> Sure, but the system may well have 128 GB of memory installed in it
>>> (for example), and only 23 GB allocated to that specific machine -
>>> that's my point.
>>
>> And my point is "where the **** do you get a system that can handle more
>> than 16GB of RAM from?!"
> 
> GIYF. ;-)
> 
> Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking 
> very specialized hardware here.

Well, a 24GB system is expensive but main-street now.
(I built one in june): based on i7 implied triple channel memory, and
therefore most single i7-supporting motherboard are limited to 24GB.
Finding a set of 6 Ram-stick to fill the slots is rather easy too, as
memory-maker/seller make kit ready to install (and with warranty).

Motherboard: about 200€
Memory: about 800€
CPU: anywhere from 200 to 1000€
Box: from 50€ to 200€ (according to the cooling and other
easy-life-making: hand-screw, clip-on...)
and so on for the small details (mouse, keyboard, graphics card(s),
display...)

There you go, a system with more than 16GB.

Post a reply to this message

> GIYF. ;-)
> 
> Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking 
> very specialized hardware here.

What like this:

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173974

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> It was funny, tho. I read someone talking about all the "nosql" 
> databases, and how people were complaining SQL doesn't "scale".  He said 
> "SQL scales fine. What the people mean is that SQL doesn't scale if you 
> want to use a commodity piece of hardware like Amazon rents. This is 
> what we have in my office for testing:" and gives the stats on a 96-CPU 
> 256G RAM SQL processor. He says "That's the low-end base machine for 
> testing, not the production system."

Presumably that's not x86 though.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Presumably that's not x86 though.

I didn't look into it that deeply. Why would you think it's not?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

>> Presumably that's not x86 though.
> 
> I didn't look into it that deeply. Why would you think it's not?

I got the impression that x86 CPUs are designed to communicate with only 
a fixed number of peers.

For example, a socket 939 Athlon can only be run in a single-chip 
configuration. But a socket 940 Opteron has an extra pin which enables 
it to run in single-chip or dual-chip configuration. (But not 
triple-chip or more.) In later Opteron generations, part of the model 
number tells you what the maximum number of chips you can wire together 
is. I gather Intel Xeon chips use a similar system.

Given that the reviews talk about 1-chip, 2-chip, 4-chip and even 
8-chip, I very much doubt anybody has bothered to design a 96-chip part. 
Who would they sell it to, after all? (And wouldn't it need 96 extra pins??)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2010/07/the-new-amazon-ec2-instance-type-the-cluster-compute-instance.html

> Rent a quad-core 2HT 2.93GHz 23G RAM 1.5TB disk compute engine for $1.60/hour.

  I wonder if POV-Ray 3.7 could be compiled for this monster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_%28computer%29

  It has more cores than the maximum number of threads POV-Ray would use for
an average-sized image (iow. you basically get a core for each square to which
the image is subdivided by POV-Ray for rendering).

  A giant poster-sized image could perhaps require rendering more than one
square per core...

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   A giant poster-sized image could perhaps require rendering more than one
> square per core...

I think the first job should be rendering a 300 DPI 1:1 scale image of the 
computer it ran on. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On 7/14/2010 12:09 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Well, yeah - but I'm not going to find it going to the local Best Buy,
>> that's what I mean. :-)
>
> It is indeed not a "Personal Computer" sort of thing. :-)
>

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6426353&Sku=E145-2082

I'm thinking one that supports 4-way SLI is probably a gaming system. ;)

Supports up to 48GB of ram, dual hex-core xeons ... yeah..

A bit pricey, though.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On 7/15/2010 10:32 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>> Presumably that's not x86 though.
>>
>> I didn't look into it that deeply. Why would you think it's not?
>
> I got the impression that x86 CPUs are designed to communicate with only
> a fixed number of peers.

http://www.cray.com/Products/XT/Specifications.aspx

Opterons ... x86 ;)



http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?p=MB-H8DGUF&c=fr&pid=ea8e96795a53689a8306610b250b775faaf92905edde9d71f42a3e02a2c3931c

So, its a dual chip mobo ... unless you make it yourself like Cray ...
24 cores is probably enough.

> Given that the reviews talk about 1-chip, 2-chip, 4-chip and even
> 8-chip, I very much doubt anybody has bothered to design a 96-chip part.
> Who would they sell it to, after all? (And wouldn't it need 96 extra
> pins??)

Cray has, but then, it's a purpose-built machine.
-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 08:35:00 +0200, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> Well, a 24GB system is expensive but main-street now. (I built one in
> june):

The fact that you built it demonstrates it's not "off the shelf" - it's a 
custom build. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 08:36:30 +0200, scott wrote:

>> GIYF. ;-)
>> 
>> Hint:  It's not your typical off-the-shelf desktop PC.  We're talking
>> very specialized hardware here.
> 
> What like this:
> 
> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173974

Yes.  Now go to Best Buy and buy a system based on that system board.  
That's what I'm talking about when I say "off the shelf".  I can get 
laser pointers pretty much anywhere I go, but to get something more 
powerful, you have to go to a place like Wicked Lasers - yes, you can buy 
stuff "off the shelf" from them, but they're a specialty vendor, which is 
my point.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173974
>
> Yes.  Now go to Best Buy and buy a system based on that system board.

It seems nearly all boards for i7 take up to 24 GB, and certainly in the 
"mainstream" shops here you can buy i7 systems for a normal price.

Post a reply to this message

>> I got the impression that x86 CPUs are designed to communicate with only
>> a fixed number of peers.
> 
> http://www.cray.com/Products/XT/Specifications.aspx
> 
> Opterons ... x86 ;)

Yes, a conspicuous number of supercomputers use Opteron and not Xeon.

>> Given that the reviews talk about 1-chip, 2-chip, 4-chip and even
>> 8-chip, I very much doubt anybody has bothered to design a 96-chip part.
>> Who would they sell it to, after all? (And wouldn't it need 96 extra
>> pins??)
> 
> Cray has, but then, it's a purpose-built machine.

I meant that the CPU has to be designed to operate with X number of 
peers - so you'd have to design a Opteron or whatever with pins for 96 
other peers. Which presumably AMD haven't done.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> I got the impression that x86 CPUs are designed to communicate with only 
> a fixed number of peers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckton_%28microprocessor%29#Beckton

"The 75xx models have four QuickPath interfaces, so it can be used in 
up-to eight-socket configurations, while the 65xx models are only for up 
to two sockets."



Also... They make 8-core Xeons now?! o_O I bet those a cheap.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> Also... They make 8-core Xeons now?! o_O I bet those a cheap.

Bugger that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Opteron_microprocessors#Twelve-core_Server_processors

Heh. 12-core chips in a 2- or 4-socket configuration? That's, like, 48 
cores or something! That's crazy...

(Then again, last I heard Opteron isn't as fast as Xeon.)

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:46:53 +0200, scott wrote:

>>> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173974
>>
>> Yes.  Now go to Best Buy and buy a system based on that system board.
> 
> It seems nearly all boards for i7 take up to 24 GB, and certainly in the
> "mainstream" shops here you can buy i7 systems for a normal price.

Shows how recently I've purchased a system. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Though it'd be nice to have one or three. ;-)
> 

I actually have pretty free access to about 50 computers of about this 
capability, but exactly the opposite problem -- not enough free time to 
do any serious POVing that would warrant their use.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:50:37 -0700, Kevin Wampler wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> 
>> Though it'd be nice to have one or three. ;-)
>> 
>> 
> I actually have pretty free access to about 50 computers of about this
> capability, but exactly the opposite problem -- not enough free time to
> do any serious POVing that would warrant their use.

I know that feeling well as well.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Though it'd be nice to have one or three. ;-)
> 
> I actually have pretty free access to about 50 computers of about this 
> capability, but exactly the opposite problem -- not enough free time to 
> do any serious POVing that would warrant their use.

Surely there's profit to be made there! ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message