Thanks for that Ross, I hadn't consider that.Some more food for thought.
On 22 June 2013 21:12, Ross Walker <rosscwalker.gmail.com> wrote:
> You need to be looking at DUAL socket motherboards if you want 4-way x16
> support. A single CPU does not have enough bandwidth (pins) to support true
> 4 by x16 - they cheat using pxii switches.
>
> All the Exxact machines on the Amber website are dual socket by quad slot
> x16. Of course this makes them more expensive than the budget single socket
> systems you can build for sub $1000 (exc GPU cost).
>
> All the best
> Ross
>
>
>
> On Jun 22, 2013, at 12:45, ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Looks like the Asus P9X79-E WS is for you then Scott! :) Haven't seen
> many
> > (if any!) boards with that anount of bandwidth so far.
> >
> > br,
> > g
> >
> >
> > On 22 June 2013 19:31, Scott Le Grand <varelse2005.gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It may be overkill now but I'm planning to revisit the Multi GPU code in
> >> the near future and that's why I need a motherboard that can really take
> >> advantage of it.
> >> On Jun 22, 2013 10:12 AM, "ET" <sketchfoot.gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks v much for you specs Divi. :) I've been debating with myself as
> my
> >>> board as it looks good and has a very nice spec. From what I've read,
> the
> >>> only problems with it is the higher than average power draw.
> >>>
> >>> .Scott. I believe the board runs in x8/x8/x8/x8 for a 4 GPU config - so
> >>> effectively PCI2 2.0 x16 rate. Would this present any problems, if you
> >>> were running the serial GPU code, From what I read on the AMBER GPU
> >>> hardware page, this is more important for the parallel GPU code?
> Though,
> >> I
> >>> imagine having 4x serial ruins going simultaneously would also tax the
> >> GPU
> >>> to CPU interface, though how much I'm not sure.
> >>>
> >>> Apparently, if you are going intel, you can only acheive PCIe 3.0 using
> >> at
> >>> least a Sandy Bridge-E or ivy bridge CPU in a socket 155. Please
> correct
> >> me
> >>> if I have understood this incorrectly though.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.enthusiastpc.net/articles/00003/3.aspx
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> A socket 2011 proposition would be the Asus P9X79-E WES which has 2x
> PLX
> >>> PEX 8747 chips so can run at x16/x16/x16/x16 with four GPUs
> >>>
> >>> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P9X79E_WS/#specifications
> >>>
> >>> However, I'm unsure whether this is overkill for running 4xGPUs doing
> >> AMBER
> >>> serial code.
> >>>
> >>> What do you guys think?
> >>>
> >>> br,
> >>> g
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 22 June 2013 16:15, Scott Le Grand <varelse2005.gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Does this MB support full p2p at 16x PCIE Gen 3 speeds between all 4
> >>> GPUs?
> >>>> On Jun 21, 2013 4:09 PM, "Divi/GMAIL" <dvenkatlu.gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ET:
> >>>>> I am using GA-Z77X-UP7 that has PLX chipset and supports 3rd Gen
> >>>> LGA1155
> >>>>> socket. Bought together with 2 TITANS sometime in March.
> >>>>> It has been running pretty stable 24/7 since then. I thought of
> >>> buying
> >>>>> two more titans later to fill all four slots. With so much mess
> >> going
> >>> on
> >>>>> with TITANS, I put off that plan until the dust settles. You might
> >>> want
> >>>> to
> >>>>> check new 4th GEN cpus and supporting motherboards as the Hardware
> >> keep
> >>>>> changing pretty rapidly these days.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have i5-processor with 16 GB ram and 256 GB SSD. All four PCI-E
> >>>> lanes
> >>>>> are X-16. It also has native X-16 link directly "hardwired" to
> >>> CPU-lanes
> >>>>> that will bypass PLX chipset, in case if you run single GPU. This
> >> might
> >>>>> reduce a bit of latency but not much. I get 35ns/day on FIX/NVE
> >>> benchmark
> >>>>> bypassing PLX chipset, but get about 34ns/day using PLX chipset (on
> >>> TITAN
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> course!!). Not a deal breaker..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Link below:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4334#ov
> >>>>>
> >>>>> HTH
> >>>>> Divi
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: ET
> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 8:18 PM
> >>>>> To: AMBER Mailing List
> >>>>> Subject: [AMBER] Anyone running machines with Quad GPU setups
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I was looking at getting a new mobo to run a quad GPU system. I was
> >>>>> wondering if anyone has done this. If you could post the model & make
> >>> of:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) motherboard
> >>>>> 2) CPU
> >>>>> 3) RAM
> >>>>> 4) Case
> >>>>> 5) The aggregate estimate of ns in simulation you have run on your
> >>> setup
> >>>>> without issue,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would be much obliged! :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> br,
> >>>>> g
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> AMBER mailing list
> >>>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> AMBER mailing list
> >>>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> AMBER mailing list
> >>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> AMBER mailing list
> >>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AMBER mailing list
> >> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > AMBER mailing list
> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Sat Jun 22 2013 - 13:30:03 PDT
