Bottlenecks

[Jure Sah]

Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I am hoping this to evolve into an interesting discussion.

Thanks for your answers in advance.

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Mike T.]

Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I am hoping this to evolve into an interesting discussion.

Thanks for your answers in advance.

What's the point? You'd have to re-build it in 2-3 months, anyway. But
you'd have to start with dual processors (each could be dual-core), which
would rule out most Microsoft Operating systems and apps. that run on
Microsoft Operating systems.

Otherwise, the fastest windows machine would be whatever the most expensive
AMD proc. is at the moment, with whatever mainboard sports the fastest
chipset AND allows the most RAM installed. Then you'd have to put in a PCI
expansion card to add even MORE RAM, and likely tweak the heck out of the
OS, so it will use the extra RAM. Oh, and if you think your video cards
(two) are going to cost less than four figures each, you're thinking too
small.

Then you'd need a bunch of 10K RPM hard drives, each with 16MB or more of
cache. You'd have to specifically NOT RAID them. That is, if you want "top
performance". To me, "top performance" means fastest that the system can
run without undue risk of data corruption. So no RAID, regardless of type.
Either it'll slow you down, or make it more likely to lose your data.

Same with overclocking. It can be done, but if you are looking for "top
performance" in a reliable machine, just throw more money at it.

You'd also need a single power supply somewhere in the 1KW range, and don't
skimp on it (if that's even possible). -Dave

 

[EDM]

Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

Intel Core Duo/Conroe w/ Crossfire'd ATI X1900's and
the fastest DDR2 memory you can find. That's as good
as it gets right now, and within a few weeks you can look
forward to an entirely new batch of video cards, DX10,
and eventually (early '07) 64-bit MS OS's, which will
render the aforementioned system obsolete

Forget AMD, even the new AM2's are looking to be
inferior in every respect to Conroe. Even AMD admits it.

 

[Conor]

Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I am hoping this to evolve into an interesting discussion.

Thanks for your answers in advance.

Solid State storage...non of this hard drive nonsense.

 

[Jure Sah]

Mike T. pravi:

What's the point? You'd have to re-build it in 2-3 months, anyway.

The point is in the subject line. If imagine building the ultimate
computer, you have to make sure you've discovered and eliminated all
possible bottlenecks. That information can then also be used to build
quick, neat and relatively cheap machines.

But
you'd have to start with dual processors (each could be dual-core), which
would rule out most Microsoft Operating systems and apps. that run on
Microsoft Operating systems.

Say a 4 CPU motherboard (I haven't seen any with more CPUs on them,
short of clusters), each dual core and each equiped with 4 GB of RAM.
You are then looking at an operating system that can handle all that and
you have a basic modern server system. But that is not the ultimate
computer.

Otherwise, the fastest windows machine would be whatever the most expensive
AMD proc. is at the moment, with whatever mainboard sports the fastest
chipset AND allows the most RAM installed. Then you'd have to put in a PCI
expansion card to add even MORE RAM, and likely tweak the heck out of the
OS, so it will use the extra RAM.

Okay, so there are extension cards for adding RAM. Which bus would you
use for the generic cards on the motherboard? PCI64 or PCI-Express (or
something else)?

Intel processors can support up to 4 GB, technically. AMD processors can
do more (how much already?). Obviously we will not be running this on
Windows as Windows only supports 3 GB and that with special tweaks. It
cannot be coerced to use any more.

Is there any OS in particular that you would like for this? A 64-bit
compiled Linux? Or one of the professional UNIXes?

Oh, and if you think your video cards
(two) are going to cost less than four figures each, you're thinking too
small.

So, we got bridged PCI-Express graphic cards.

Then you'd need a bunch of 10K RPM hard drives, each with 16MB or more of
cache. You'd have to specifically NOT RAID them. That is, if you want "top
performance". To me, "top performance" means fastest that the system can
run without undue risk of data corruption. So no RAID, regardless of type.
Either it'll slow you down, or make it more likely to lose your data.

I got a RAID0 here and face no data corruption whatsoever. Does my
computer thus defy reality?

I suppose you could have several harddrives linked into a RAID which is
not plain 0, but something with redundancy and performance for example
RAID50.

Those expensive controllers have a DDR memory slot for disk cache alone,
so you're basically looking at 1 GB of hardware disk cache, and thus
disk transfers, of about the same as the maximum data rate of your bus
of choice, for all bursts of transfers up to 1 GB.

Same with overclocking. It can be done, but if you are looking for "top
performance" in a reliable machine, just throw more money at it.

It is possible to overclock a processor without risking corruption. That
is, to overclock it up to the levels that the manufacturer intended
anyway, supply the proper cooling. How about cooling with condensator
oil? It's very efficient and I've seen it done and in certain cases it
does not even require active circulation.

You'd also need a single power supply somewhere in the 1KW range, and don't
skimp on it (if that's even possible). -Dave

So a big, fat, stable, reliable powersupply. Can do.


--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Jure Sah]

EDM pravi:

Intel Core Duo/Conroe w/ Crossfire'd ATI X1900's and
the fastest DDR2 memory you can find.

So what is in these ATI graphic cards that makes them the best of the best?

That's as good
as it gets right now, and within a few weeks you can look
forward to an entirely new batch of video cards, DX10,

What would DirectX 10 bring in requirements to these systems to make
them obstolete?

and eventually (early '07) 64-bit MS OS's, which will
render the aforementioned system obsolete

Microsoft has not exactly shown any particular capacity to utilize new
technologies (for example mult-coreness), I don't expect any shocks in
the future.

Forget AMD, even the new AM2's are looking to be
inferior in every respect to Conroe. Even AMD admits it.

As I understand Conroe isn't even out yet. Once it's released and
actively benchmarked, you can tell me if it's better or not. For now,
it's just a little bit of Intel's self-praise.

But since we are looking at an immaginary system, can you describe the
exact characteristics of the ultimate CPU? It does not have to exist yet.


--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Jure Sah]

Conor pravi:

Solid State storage...non of this hard drive nonsense.

Ah yes the new technology for next generation SRAM. But SRAM existed
before too and anyone could have built a boot-from-SRAM system if they
wanted to, especially those who don't care so much about the price. Yet
I didn't see anything like that happening now, did you?

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[EDM]

EDM pravi:

So what is in these ATI graphic cards that makes them the best of the best?


What would DirectX 10 bring in requirements to these systems to make
them obstolete?


Microsoft has not exactly shown any particular capacity to utilize new
technologies (for example mult-coreness), I don't expect any shocks in
the future.


As I understand Conroe isn't even out yet. Once it's released and
actively benchmarked, you can tell me if it's better or not. For now,
it's just a little bit of Intel's self-praise.

Try understanding a little harder. Instead of being stoopid
and lazy, simply go to Google, enter 'conroe review' or
'E6700' or "DX10" etc etc etc and start reading.

 

[Jure Sah]

EDM pravi:

Try understanding a little harder. Instead of being stoopid
and lazy, simply go to Google, enter 'conroe review' or
'E6700' or "DX10" etc etc etc and start reading.

Can you actually ever try to say anything useful without exploding at
people in a giant cloud of improperly spelled insults?

If you're so smart and all knowing that you can positively asses that an
Intel processor that will start selling next year and of which nothing
is known so far is actually better than any AMD, why in the world can't
you explain yourself here?

I googled up on Conroe and out of the many articles that perform
guesswork with a lot of imagination, some actually point out that
nothing is actually known of the processor and that everything written
about it is pure speculation until the processor can be tested on a
wider variety of hardware and applications.

As for DX10, yes, no shit, it's another DirectX. You'd never guess it
but I knew that already. So what exactly is the news that makes you so
very sure it'll be better in actual performance than, say, DirectX 9 and
belonging graphic cards? Because I AM the original poster and that IS
what I asked, you know...

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[John Doe]

Conor pravi:

Ah yes the new technology for next generation SRAM. But SRAM
existed before too and anyone could have built a boot-from-SRAM
system if they wanted to, especially those who don't care so much
about the price. Yet I didn't see anything like that happening
now, did you?

Flash drives.

 

[John Doe]

EDM pravi:

Can you actually ever try to say anything useful without exploding
at people in a giant cloud of improperly spelled insults?

Improperly spelled? Your grammar stinks, but I can tell English is
your second language (and that's cool IMO) so I wasn't going to
comment on that.

Are you new to USENET?

 

[Jure Sah]

John Doe pravi:

Flash drives.

Oh yes... on mass m8!

Somehow... just... never seen one even promoted to successfully boot
from an USB flash drive. DOS yes, but not more than that. And that USB
connection isn't quite fast either.

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Jure Sah]

John Doe pravi:

Are you new to USENET?

There's one to Google for you...

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Mxsmanic]

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I'd want ultra-fast static RAM as fast as processor cache so that the
processor never waits for anything in memory at all, and I'd want
gigabytes of it. I'd want disk drives at least a hundred times faster
than anything currently available. I'd want network connections at
least one thousand times faster than anything currently available.
That should cover most of the bottlenecks. The last thing I'd worry
about would be CPU speed.

Also, if I were running an OS with a GUI, I'd want a separate GPU and
graphics subsystem with all of the same characteristics.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Say a 4 CPU motherboard (I haven't seen any with more CPUs on them,
short of clusters), each dual core and each equiped with 4 GB of RAM.
You are then looking at an operating system that can handle all that and
you have a basic modern server system. But that is not the ultimate
computer.

What is this obsession with CPUs? CPU speed is rarely a bottleneck in
modern systems.

Those expensive controllers have a DDR memory slot for disk cache alone,
so you're basically looking at 1 GB of hardware disk cache, and thus
disk transfers, of about the same as the maximum data rate of your bus
of choice, for all bursts of transfers up to 1 GB.

Transfer rates are not the problem with disks. Access time is the
problem.

 

[Phil_12345]

Jure Sah wrote:
Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I am hoping this to evolve into an interesting discussion.

What kind of budget are you thinking of: few hundred million dollars or
a few billion dollars. If you have that kind of money then why you
still thinking in term small PC. Hell, call IBM to build a nice super
computer system; build a small air conditioned building to store it and
the whole system is cooled by liquid nitrogen.

So stop dreaming now and go back and build what ever you can aford at
the moment !!!

 

[Rod Speed]

Jure Sah writes

What is this obsession with CPUs? CPU speed
is rarely a bottleneck in modern systems.

Transfer rates are not the problem with disks.

They are for some ops like imaging and copying and editing large files.

Access time is the problem.

Sometimes it is, often it isnt.

 

[Phil_12345]

Jure Sah wrote:
Hello,

I am asking everybody: If you had all the money in the world to make a
perfect system that had NO bottlenecks whatsoever and top performance,
what would you put togather?

I am hoping this to evolve into an interesting discussion.

Here is another suggestion: If you have that kind of money, then why
be ordinary.

1) For a few billions $$$; Intel/Amd will create you a nice custom CPU
- complete with self-cooling feature that included 10, 20,... cores
(cost you more if you want more cores on the die).

2) For a few billions $$$; I'm sure Asus/Abit or whoever would create a
nice MB that would work with the above CPU plus all PCI-Exp/PCI/MEM
slot and all the bell and stuff you ever want.

3) For a couple more billion $$$; ATI / Nvidia would put together a 10,
20, 30 top of the line GPU SLI together (instead of 2 SLI now a day) -
make sure the above MB has enough PCI Exp slots for let say 20 graphics
card SLI.

4) For a few millions $$$; someone will create you a nice case to fit
the MB all the above stuff; along with a nice high power PS (1,000,000
Watt)

5) For a billion or two; someone will make you a couple Tregabite of
RAM (make sure your MB support unlimited memory).

6) For a few more billion, MS will customize it's WinXP or Vista to
run in your hardware (one copy only)

7) Someone will make you a few solid-state HD (the size will depend on
how much you are willing to spend).

8) For a few millions; I'm sure someone will make you a wall of nice
flat LCD/Plasma screens for you super-dupper one of the kind PC.

That would cover all major components - the small stuff is up to you.

The question is it practical? NO
and probably no one ever crazy enough to do it (even if money is no
question).

If I have that kind of money; I wouldn't spend it on PC at all; I
would rather travell around the world in my jet or yatch and play with
women instead of sitting infront of the PC.

 

[Jure Sah]

Rod Speed pravi:

They are for some ops like imaging and copying and editing large files.

Well many programs do need to load up large amounts of data before they
begin processing. If you increase the rate at which a system is capable
of providing or storing data, the load times decrease.

Also there are certain issues about usage of the disks. On a Windows
system, every program waits and accesses the disks directly (there is no
memory pool like in the Linuxes), thus one or more programs accessing
each a large file simultaneously will slow down the transfer rates
greatly. And this is usually the case when one has an Anti-virus package
installed and runs several applications, like something that uses a 500
MB mailbox at the same time as anything else.

Sometimes it is, often it isnt.

If you got enough cache, the prefetching and caching will zero out the
access time in most situations. What kind of cases are we talking about?

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

 

[Jure Sah]

(e-mail address removed) pravi:

What kind of budget are you thinking of: few hundred million dollars or
a few billion dollars. If you have that kind of money then why you
still thinking in term small PC. Hell, call IBM to build a nice super
computer system; build a small air conditioned building to store it and
the whole system is cooled by liquid nitrogen.

Some of the local institutions have some supercomputers that aren't
currently being used. I once asked somebody who had access to them if we
could go and take them for a spin since they're not being used anyway. I
was disappointed to learn that supercomputers are highly specialized and
don't actually provide the kind of processing power one could use in PC
software.

So stop dreaming now and go back and build what ever you can aford at
the moment !!!

Whatever you could afford for those billions of dollars, a supercomputer
is simply not the ultimate computer. But build a supercomputer that is
capable of running PC software very very well, then you will see my point.

--
Primary function: Coprocessor
Secondary function: Cluster commander

http://www.thought-beacon.net

Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah

We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011