What about the argument that its time to depth that matters?jdart wrote:Some benchmarks (Stockfish 8, 16G hash):
32-core dual Opteron (2xOpteron 6376, 1/4 of the AMD server box, Linux):
26.3M nps
24-core dual Opteron (2xOpteron 6344, Linux):
21.8M nps
dual Xeon 2670 (16 cores, Linux):
24.0M nps
i7-6900k (8 cores, Windows):
14.08M nps
128-core AMD server
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 1080
- Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:55 pm
- Location: USA/Minnesota
- Full name: Leo Anger
Re: 128-core AMD server
Advanced Micro Devices fan.
-
- Posts: 1080
- Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:55 pm
- Location: USA/Minnesota
- Full name: Leo Anger
Re: 128-core AMD server
I have a 15 amp breaker that kept tripping. It was hot to the touch. I now have to wait until I can hook up the computer to 20 amps.jdart wrote:Rates in my area ramp up with usage and I have once in a while hit their "super overcharge now we're really serious" rate level, whatever they actually call it.
I am planning to get solar panels on the house next year.
--Jon
Advanced Micro Devices fan.
-
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:36 am
Re: 128-core AMD server
TTD is a useless measurement for LazySMP.What about the argument that its time to depth that matters?
-
- Posts: 3226
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 10:31 pm
- Location: Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina
Re: 128-core AMD server
Have your electrician check for a loose connection also. There could be a problem where the wire connects to the circuit breaker (small possibility) or where the circuit breaker plugs onto the electrical panel busbar (greater possibility). It is doubtful that you have a large enough overcurrent to cause the circuit breaker to be hot to the touch.Leo wrote:I have a 15 amp breaker that kept tripping. It was hot to the touch. I now have to wait until I can hook up the computer to 20 amps.jdart wrote:Rates in my area ramp up with usage and I have once in a while hit their "super overcharge now we're really serious" rate level, whatever they actually call it.
I am planning to get solar panels on the house next year.
--Jon
My guess is that the connection between the breaker and busbar is failing.
-
- Posts: 1080
- Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:55 pm
- Location: USA/Minnesota
- Full name: Leo Anger
Re: 128-core AMD server
I have read over and over that a powerful 8-16 core machine will defeat a 32-64 core machine. After 16 to 20 cores it scales very badly. Has something changed or is this still true?
Advanced Micro Devices fan.
-
- Posts: 1080
- Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:55 pm
- Location: USA/Minnesota
- Full name: Leo Anger
Re: 128-core AMD server
Thanks for the info.Adam Hair wrote:Have your electrician check for a loose connection also. There could be a problem where the wire connects to the circuit breaker (small possibility) or where the circuit breaker plugs onto the electrical panel busbar (greater possibility). It is doubtful that you have a large enough overcurrent to cause the circuit breaker to be hot to the touch.Leo wrote:I have a 15 amp breaker that kept tripping. It was hot to the touch. I now have to wait until I can hook up the computer to 20 amps.jdart wrote:Rates in my area ramp up with usage and I have once in a while hit their "super overcharge now we're really serious" rate level, whatever they actually call it.
I am planning to get solar panels on the house next year.
--Jon
My guess is that the connection between the breaker and busbar is failing.
Advanced Micro Devices fan.
-
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:36 am
Re: 128-core AMD server
It was never true? This has more to do with clock speed, heat generation, and power consumption than any sort of scaling issue.I have read over and over that a powerful 8-16 core machine will defeat a 32-64 core machine. After 16 to 20 cores it scales very badly. Has something changed or is this still true?
Generally, the more cores per chip the lower the base and boost clocks because you can only dissipate so much heat per mm^2, unless you want to move to water cooling or something more exotic.
But the idea that more cores are somehow inherently bad is just bullshit. Are there diminishing returns, yes. Does performance per dollar drop drastically, yes. But more nodes searched at higher depths will always be better than nothing (provided equal clocks).
-
- Posts: 778
- Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 7:11 am
Re: 128-core AMD server
So you're saying that LazySMP finds better moves at equal depths rather than finding the same move faster.jhellis3 wrote:TTD is a useless measurement for LazySMP.What about the argument that its time to depth that matters?
-
- Posts: 4367
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:23 am
- Location: http://www.arasanchess.org
Re: 128-core AMD server
Arasan scales quite badly on 32 cores, at present. It is on my to-do list to look at soon.
But other engines do better: Stockfish for example.
Crafty also uses multiple cores efficiently and can hits amazingly high NPS, but I haven't tried it on this 32 core box.
--Jon
But other engines do better: Stockfish for example.
Crafty also uses multiple cores efficiently and can hits amazingly high NPS, but I haven't tried it on this 32 core box.
--Jon
-
- Posts: 12542
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
- Location: Redmond, WA USA
Re: 128-core AMD server
Texel scales brilliantlyjdart wrote:Arasan scales quite badly on 32 cores, at present. It is on my to-do list to look at soon.
But other engines do better: Stockfish for example.
Crafty also uses multiple cores efficiently and can hits amazingly high NPS, but I haven't tried it on this 32 core box.
--Jon
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.