> On 29 Sep 2017, at 15:24, Lawrence Mitchell
> wrote:
>
>> according to
>> https://ark.intel.com/products/75283/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2697-v2-30M-Cache-2_70-GHz
>> you get 59.7 GB/sec of peak memory bandwidth per CPU, so you should get
>> about 240 GB/sec
> On 29 Sep 2017, at 15:05, Tobin Isaac wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 09:04:47AM -0400, Tobin Isaac wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:19:54PM +0100, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I'm attempting to understand some results I'm getting for matmult
Hi Lawrence,
according to
https://ark.intel.com/products/75283/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2697-v2-30M-Cache-2_70-GHz
you get 59.7 GB/sec of peak memory bandwidth per CPU, so you should get
about 240 GB/sec for your two-node system.
If you use PETSc's `make streams`, then processor placement may
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 09:04:47AM -0400, Tobin Isaac wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:19:54PM +0100, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I'm attempting to understand some results I'm getting for matmult
> > performance. In particular, it looks like I'm obtaining timings that
> >
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:19:54PM +0100, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I'm attempting to understand some results I'm getting for matmult
> performance. In particular, it looks like I'm obtaining timings that suggest
> that I'm getting more main memory bandwidth than I think is
Dear all,
I'm attempting to understand some results I'm getting for matmult performance.
In particular, it looks like I'm obtaining timings that suggest that I'm
getting more main memory bandwidth than I think is possible.
The run setup is using 2 24 core (dual socket) ivybridge nodes (Xeon