Hello, I have the luxury of being allowed to buy myself a new computer for my work at university (phd student). Needless to say it will run openSUSE :) However I am not really up to date as to what CPU arch to choose, especially one well supported by linux. I was hoping maybe the list could give me a few tips. I would like something new enough but dont want to run the risk of having to custom compile lots of things or dealing with obscure platform issues. My OS should facilitate my work, not be the work... Also if it is too cutting edge integration with other systems could be difficult. The PC shall be used for lots of programming (matlab/java/C++) and compute intensive simulations so compilation and compute speed are pretty important. So I guess I should lean towards 64bit? Or maybe the new dual cores? People have told me AMD is the way to go? Any tips are appreciated, Cheers Dirk -- Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch? NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie
Dirk Gorissen wrote:
Hello, I have the luxury of being allowed to buy myself a new computer for my work at university (phd student). Needless to say it will run openSUSE :) However I am not really up to date as to what CPU arch to choose, especially one well supported by linux. I was hoping maybe the list could give me a few tips.
I would like something new enough but dont want to run the risk of having to custom compile lots of things or dealing with obscure platform issues. My OS should facilitate my work, not be the work... Also if it is too cutting edge integration with other systems could be difficult.
The PC shall be used for lots of programming (matlab/java/C++) and compute intensive simulations so compilation and compute speed are pretty important. So I guess I should lean towards 64bit? Or maybe the new dual cores? People have told me AMD is the way to go?
Any tips are appreciated, Cheers Dirk
Depending on how much "cpu intensive" work you do and youd budget, Opteron or Power. IBM's thrown its wait behind Linux on Power, and for a long time the only OS choice at all form AMD-64 was Linux. I think youwill a) Find examples of each in a fairly modest budget b) Find examples of each in the world's top 500 supercomputers. In Intel Xeon from IBM is probably worth a look: IBM has its own chipset, and it performs better than Intel's. However, I'm inclined towards AMD over Intel. If you ise AMD-64 or compatible, also look at Interl's icc: it can save a truckload of CPU.
On Friday 16 December 2005 7:48 am, John Summerfield wrote:
Depending on how much "cpu intensive" work you do and youd budget, Opteron or Power. I've seen some benchmarks between the Intel EM64T and the AMD-64. For CPU intensive work, they are roughly equal, but for memory or peripheral issues, AMD-64 is better.
If you ise AMD-64 or compatible, also look at Interl's icc: it can save a truckload of CPU. Intel's ICC compiler can generate some very efficient code. I did some benchmarks on the IA64 with the ICC compiler against GCC, and found results were significantly faster using ICC. GCC is certainly better for portability, but ICC has a mode for full GCC compatibility. It is a closed source compiler, but is free for personal use.
Also note that a 64-bit application may not run faster in 64-bit mode.
Depends on the application. When building on x86-64 platforms, you can
chose to build either 64-bit or 32-bit.
--
Jerry Feldman
Isn't anybody considering Alpha's anymore? Peter. On Friday 16 December 2005 15:34, Jerry Feldman wrote:
On Friday 16 December 2005 7:48 am, John Summerfield wrote:
Depending on how much "cpu intensive" work you do and youd budget, Opteron or Power.
I've seen some benchmarks between the Intel EM64T and the AMD-64. For CPU intensive work, they are roughly equal, but for memory or peripheral issues, AMD-64 is better.
If you ise AMD-64 or compatible, also look at Interl's icc: it can save a truckload of CPU.
Intel's ICC compiler can generate some very efficient code. I did some benchmarks on the IA64 with the ICC compiler against GCC, and found results were significantly faster using ICC. GCC is certainly better for portability, but ICC has a mode for full GCC compatibility. It is a closed source compiler, but is free for personal use.
Also note that a 64-bit application may not run faster in 64-bit mode. Depends on the application. When building on x86-64 platforms, you can chose to build either 64-bit or 32-bit. -- Jerry Feldman
Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
On Friday 16 December 2005 9:41 am, Peter M. Groen wrote:
Isn't anybody considering Alpha's anymore? I love the Alpha, but it is end-of-lifed and no longer actively supported by most Linux distros. Debian still provides a current port to the Alpha. Note that future development of the Alpha chip was stopped before HP acquired Compaq.
--
Jerry Feldman
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 10:03:05AM -0500, Jerry Feldman wrote:
On Friday 16 December 2005 9:41 am, Peter M. Groen wrote:
Isn't anybody considering Alpha's anymore? I love the Alpha, but it is end-of-lifed and no longer actively supported by most Linux distros. Debian still provides a current port to the Alpha. Note that future development of the Alpha chip was stopped before HP acquired Compaq.
Didn't 10.1 just get ported to Alpha though? Personally if I needed HARDCORE CPU power, I'd go with Quad Xeons and a Gog or two of RAM, or maybe A big BIG 24 Processor Sun machine. I think Linux can run on those. -Allen
-- Jerry Feldman
Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Friday 16 December 2005 1:34 pm, Allen wrote:
Didn't 10.1 just get ported to Alpha though?
Personally if I needed HARDCORE CPU power, I'd go with Quad Xeons and a Gog or two of RAM, or maybe A big BIG 24 Processor Sun machine. I think Linux can run on those. That would be great, but I don't think so. Not sure if Linux will run on the Big Suns. It does run on the big HPs and IBMs.
--
Jerry Feldman
Le Vendredi 16 Décembre 2005 14:28, Jerry Feldman a écrit :
That would be great, but I don't think so. Not sure if Linux will run on the Big Suns. It does run on the big HPs and IBMs.
forget the alpha or the xeon take the a dual opteron dual core it will kill your xeon machine
On Friday 16 December 2005 2:25 pm, Marc Collin wrote:
forget the alpha or the xeon take the a dual opteron dual core it will kill your xeon machine The dual core AMD 64 is an excellent processor and for a few reasons I stated earlier is that the AMD chips are better than the Intel chips today. (Dual core Xeon will ship 1st quarter next year). What you want to buy really comes down to what you need the system for. Essentially a dual core chip is effectively 2 separate chips that share some of the same resources and manufacturers are promoting it as 2 chips.
The bottom line is always going to be what you are going to do with it. They
once put jet engines on a DC3 (military C-47) and didn't get any better
performance than the prop version.
You've got to look at the chip, the chipset and memory.
--
Jerry Feldman
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:21:12 -0500, Jerry Feldman wrote:
The dual core AMD 64 is an excellent processor and for a few reasons I stated earlier is that the AMD chips are better than the Intel chips today.
Define better :) IMO it depends on your POV. Philipp
Allen, On Friday 16 December 2005 10:34, Allen wrote:
...
Didn't 10.1 just get ported to Alpha though?
You're thinking of this announcement posted to the SuSE-Announce list, perhaps? -==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==- Subject: SUSE Linux 10.1 Alpha 2 is ready SUSE Linux 10.1 Alpha 2 is ready for testing. ... -==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==- That's "alpha" as in "alpha, "beta," "pre-release" / "release candidate," "final." Not Alpha the processor architecture. Randall Schulz
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 07:22:37PM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Allen,
On Friday 16 December 2005 10:34, Allen wrote:
...
Didn't 10.1 just get ported to Alpha though?
You're thinking of this announcement posted to the SuSE-Announce list, perhaps?
OMG that was a bad screw up.... Lol. -Allen.
-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==- Subject: SUSE Linux 10.1 Alpha 2 is ready
SUSE Linux 10.1 Alpha 2 is ready for testing.
... -==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
That's "alpha" as in "alpha, "beta," "pre-release" / "release candidate," "final." Not Alpha the processor architecture.
Randall Schulz
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
participants (9)
-
Allen
-
Dirk Gorissen
-
James Knott
-
Jerry Feldman
-
John Summerfield
-
Marc Collin
-
Peter M. Groen
-
Philipp Thomas
-
Randall R Schulz