> From: Ian Stokes-Rees [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Keep us updated on what you discover on this front. People have been > trying this kind of thing in different forms for quite awhile. Well, my findings so far are: The purchase cost per core is approx the same, to buy the zillions of atoms versus buying a smaller number of xeon etc of equal total compute power, but the density and power consumption of the atoms is significantly lower (an order of magnitude) thus yielding a lower total cost of ownership. Figures range from 25% to 50% lower TCO. > >From a different perspective, (and also *very* dependent on your > having a good grasp of the workload characteristics), if this is a high > value and long term workload you *may* be able to benefit from GPUs, > which effectively are hundreds of slower compute cores accessible from > the same system image, but will require a small computational kernel > which you can port to a GPU environment. One of our guys is currently exploring the possibility of porting the present jobs to GPU. It may work out, but it's fundamentally more difficult to program for a GPU, so it's less versatile for adaptation to changes of your algorithm, or new requirements. Thanks for the suggestion...
_______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
