Intel MIC (aka Xeon Phi)

A forum for discussing FAH-related hardware choices and info on actual products (not speculation).

Moderator: Site Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules before posting.
iceman1992
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Intel MIC (aka Xeon Phi)

Post by iceman1992 »

Intel announced the Xeon Phi coprocessor. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6017/inte ... oes-retail
Do you think it would be useful for FAH? Intel aims for 1 TFLOPS real world double precision performance. No word on single precision though.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:44 am
Hardware configuration: OS: Windows 10, Kubuntu 19.04
CPU: i7-6700k
GPU: GTX 970, GTX 1080 TI
RAM: 24 GB DDR4
Location: Western Washington

Re: Intel MIC

Post by Jesse_V »

That is quite impressive. I guess it will remain to be seen how F@h performs on it. Can a WU properly scale to 50+ cores? Can the data move around fast enough to be processed efficiently? What types of scientific calculations is it, and is it not, capable of? Will it require a new FAHcore? I have no idea.
F@h is now the top computing platform on the planet and nothing unites people like a dedicated fight against a common enemy. This virus affects all of us. Lets end it together.
iceman1992
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: Intel MIC

Post by iceman1992 »

I am thinking, since they have simpler cores, they will perform somewhat like GPUs. Very fast, yet not very flexible.
beer
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:18 am

Intel To Ship Xeon Phi

Post by beer »

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/06/18 ... -this-year
I wonder if this addon card will help highend folding
csvanefalk
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 10:28 am

Re: Intel MIC

Post by csvanefalk »

Will this only work in conjunction with Xeon chips, or will they go with the SB-E chips as well?
iceman1992
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: Intel MIC

Post by iceman1992 »

csvanefalk wrote:Will this only work in conjunction with Xeon chips, or will they go with the SB-E chips as well?
I guess they work only with Xeons or by themselves. From the article :
Xeon Phi co-processors can either be used as a proper co-processor alongside a traditional Xeon processor or as a standalone device
Meanwhile on the software side of things in an interesting move Intel is going to be equipping Xeon Phi co-processors with their own OS, in effect making them stand-alone computers
and
The fundamental purpose of the Xeon Phi family is to bring highly threaded processing to x86, allowing x86 developers to quickly integrate the co-processor into their existing workloads and code
Being developed "to bring highly threaded processing to x86", does it mean they're as flexible as SMP?
And since it's x86, and it runs an embedded Linux, I wonder if we can just plug it in, install FAH, and fold straight away?
Zarck
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:21 am
Hardware configuration: HP Xeons Z600 (12/24 @ 3.0 Ghz) + SLI Quadro K5000 + Quadro K5000
HP Xeons Z620 (24/48 @ 2.7 Ghz) + GeForce Titan + Geforce 1070
Location: https://itunes.apple.com/fr/book/le-cal ... 2004?mt=11
Contact:

Re: Intel MIC

Post by Zarck »

v00d00
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:53 am
Hardware configuration: FX8320e (6 cores enabled) @ stock,
- 16GB DDR3,
- Zotac GTX 1050Ti @ Stock.
- Gigabyte GTX 970 @ Stock
Debian 9.

Running GPU since it came out, CPU since client version 3.
Folding since Folding began (~2000) and ran Genome@Home for a while too.
Ran Seti@Home prior to that.
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Intel MIC

Post by v00d00 »

Looks like something similar to those Co-Proc units from a couple of years back. If they make them mainstream and affordable (ie less than $2000 per unit), then this might be a viable way for the elite folders to get a few more points. But id love it if they made them available to the mainstream users.

I guess also it will need new code to allow folding to make use of them.
Image
P5-133XL
Posts: 2948
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
Hardware configuration: Machine #1:

Intel Q9450; 2x2GB=8GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460; Windows Server 2008 X64 (SP1).

Machine #2:

Intel Q6600; 2x2GB=4GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460 video card; Windows 7 X64.

Machine 3:

Dell Dimension 8400, 3.2GHz P4 4x512GB Ram, Video card GTX 460, Windows 7 X32

I am currently folding just on the 5x GTX 460's for aprox. 70K PPD
Location: Salem. OR USA

Re: Intel MIC

Post by P5-133XL »

Unless such devices become common place it is very unlikely that Stanford is going to create a client for it. There have been several instances that Stanford has declined to create a client because there just wasn't enough of them to justify the allocation of resources. If they haven't created a GPU client for Linux why would anyone think something like this would get one...
Image
iceman1992
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: Intel MIC

Post by iceman1992 »

They will become commonplace if the price is right, as v00d00 said
Cross your fingers people ;)
verlyol
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:54 am
Hardware configuration: system 1: AMD FX6300 on Ubuntu 17.04 LTS
Location: Brabant-Wallon, Belgium

Re: Intel To Ship Xeon Phi

Post by verlyol »

careful this card uses (50) x86 cores and the total power is 1TFLOPS !
The power of NVIDIA Tesla K20 (based on the GK110) is 2TFLOPS, so be careful because the computing power is not comparable with GPGPU !

And I do not imagine the price ...
Image


I dedicate my participation to my grandmother died in 1992 because of Parkinson's disease
and to my friend Benoit died of leukemia February 18 2012 ...he was 40 years old.
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Intel MIC

Post by bruce »

P5-133XL wrote:Unless such devices become common place it is very unlikely that Stanford is going to create a client for it. There have been several instances that Stanford has declined to create a client because there just wasn't enough of them to justify the allocation of resources. If they haven't created a GPU client for Linux why would anyone think something like this would get one...
I'd predict the same thing (though I don't know any more than you do).

One side of the question is how common the hardware will be and how much actual processing power FAH can find in the donor community. Another question is how it needs to be programmed. FAH originated with the x86 instruction set and has been adapted to make use of common extensions. Programming GPUs has required a whole new programming methods and new languages/APIs. DirectX didn't work (...well?) but with CTM/CAL/Brook, the step to ATI was achieved. Then CUDA came along, making NV possible and Sony did something for the PS3. Now OpenCL has come along further extending what can be done with GPUs.

IBM has published the programming manual. That sort of implies a new and different set of proprietary programming tools (just a guess) rather than a way to drive MIC through OpenCL. Why should that be? (... though historically IBM has favored a proprietary approach.)

If you look at the picture (above) it does look a lot like a GPU without the video generating hardware.
iceman1992 wrote:I am thinking, since they have simpler cores, they will perform somewhat like GPUs. Very fast, yet not very flexible.
A lot of that actually depends on the programming interface. Future GPUs are destined to become more flexible than it was when using the first generation of FahCores written in the earlier generations of parallel languages.
7im
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Intel MIC (aka Xeon Phi)

Post by 7im »

From what I read in several places (one example), it's a Pentium 1 with customized vector units for SIMD, all optimized for FP64 (double precision). No standard x86 SIMD support (single and double), so no SSE support, so no FAH support, at least not at any great speed. It (sse and fah) would all be emulated, like on an ARM chip, and slow.

Maybe in the next gen MIC... Sorry.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
devpao
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:31 am

Re: Intel MIC (aka Xeon Phi)

Post by devpao »

My wild bet is on having a strightforwared x86 multicore support.
Microsoft is talking about multicore support since a while and having x86 instruction set without common software developement support is going to be unexpected to me.

Said this I think there is a probability for folding needing just minor changes to SMP.
I almost bet on an Intel extra help to Pande group just for good advertising (anyone from Intel reading? :) )

As last line ... any hint about the purchase price for such an interesting thing?
iceman1992
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: Intel MIC (aka Xeon Phi)

Post by iceman1992 »

@7im : from intel's blog http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2012/ ... nnovation/
The codes that run on Intel Xeon processors today will run on Intel Xeon Phi products, carrying forward years of software development.
Of course that could be just marketing BS. We'll have to wait
Post Reply