4 ms·

Some engineering software I use, uses Intel MPI libraries, and I suspect the math kernel also. The software runs 30% faster on an i7 versus a Ryzen 7, both wit

Some engineering software I use, uses Intel MPI libraries, and I suspect the math kernel also. The software runs 30% faster on an i7 versus a Ryzen 7, both with equivalent clock rate and number of cores. Given the forthcoming i9 will hit 5.3 GHz, I’m choosing Intel for my next build. Until AMD comes out with libraries and compilers targeting scientific computing, Intel may still have the lead.

jrockway 6y ago
Do Intel consumer chips support ECC memory now? Without ECC, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing any scientific computing or production serving. (I would consider using them for things like CI, though, because the price sure is good.)
- madengr 6y ago
  No, and only 64 GB max of non-ECC at that. I typically don’t run simulation of more than 1 hour though, and I’ll know when the results are wrong. My use case is CAD/real-time design for RF and EM; multiple smaller simulations of parametric sweeps, Monte Carlo, and optimization. Ryzen does support ECC, and > 64 GB, so that is a plus.
  - jrockway 6y ago
    I don't care too much about the results of my own programs, but I do worry very much about OS-level data structures. If some bit gets flipped in memory while you're extracting an update, that program will just randomly be weird forever. If some bit gets flipped in your filesystem, your data randomly disappears. Given how frequent both auto-updates and bit flips are in practice, no doubt something on my computer is corrupted somewhere. Or maybe only my backup is corrupted. Maybe it will never cause a problem, or maybe my computer will just one day become unusable. I have spent so much time debugging random failures that I see ECC memory as at least avoiding one set of possibilities, reducing the inevitable system integration time that building your own computer requires.
herbstein 6y ago
The unfortunate truth about the Intel-compiled/supplied libraries is that they deliberately only use the SIMD codepaths on Intel chips. AMD chips are forced to fall back to SSE1.

jrockway 6y ago

Do Intel consumer chips support ECC memory now? Without ECC, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing any scientific computing or production serving. (I would consider using them for things like CI, though, because the price sure is good.)

madengr 6y ago
No, and only 64 GB max of non-ECC at that. I typically don’t run simulation of more than 1 hour though, and I’ll know when the results are wrong. My use case is CAD/real-time design for RF and EM; multiple smaller simulations of parametric sweeps, Monte Carlo, and optimization. Ryzen does support ECC, and > 64 GB, so that is a plus.
- jrockway 6y ago
  I don't care too much about the results of my own programs, but I do worry very much about OS-level data structures. If some bit gets flipped in memory while you're extracting an update, that program will just randomly be weird forever. If some bit gets flipped in your filesystem, your data randomly disappears. Given how frequent both auto-updates and bit flips are in practice, no doubt something on my computer is corrupted somewhere. Or maybe only my backup is corrupted. Maybe it will never cause a problem, or maybe my computer will just one day become unusable. I have spent so much time debugging random failures that I see ECC memory as at least avoiding one set of possibilities, reducing the inevitable system integration time that building your own computer requires.

herbstein 6y ago

The unfortunate truth about the Intel-compiled/supplied libraries is that they deliberately only use the SIMD codepaths on Intel chips. AMD chips are forced to fall back to SSE1.