![]() |
|
|
#12 |
|
Mar 2003
Melbourne
5·103 Posts |
I think what you're after is a pci-express docking bay.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/12840...r_laptops.html It's an article from 2007, so not sure if anything around today exists. Or if the device in the article is suitable for this. I've never tried this personally, so your mileage may vary. I'm a fan of self-built desktops. -- Craig |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Nov 2009
2·52·7 Posts |
ewmayer,
This is what I have found PCI express enclosure Here is the youtube video of it Expressbox1 video ATI package This company creates just for ATI currently. Here is the youtube of it ViDock2 video Hopefully this helps Mathew |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Jul 2003
So Cal
2,663 Posts |
Quote:
Last fiddled with by frmky on 2010-08-10 at 05:27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
Repรบblica de California
2DEC16 Posts |
Thanks for all the links and replies!
OK, so it sounds like there's no reasonable choice but to get a full-sized desktop-style or pedestal system. Given that, next set of questions: 1. Is is cheaper to buy a discount desktop system sans GPU and install a GTX 46* oneself, or are there good reasons to go with a unit having the GPU preinstalled? (If one can get the latter for not terribly more $ than the former, I'd be happy to do that, as my limited free time is precious to me.) 2. What is the most compact format one can get the complete PC+GPU system in? Are there compact rack-mount formats one should consider? 3. I'd like to be able to build and test any GPU code under both Windows and Linux ... should I get a Win7 system (I'd have to also buy and install Visual Studio on that} and do a separate Linux install, or is there a virtual-desktop solution which is simpler to manage in this regard? Thanks, -Ernst |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Bamboozled!
"๐บ๐๐ท๐ท๐ญ"
May 2003
Down not across
2×17×347 Posts |
Quote:
Something to take into account: a beefy GPU will suck a lot of power when under full load. I suggest upgrading the stock power supply unless it's unusually well specified. Paul |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
Repรบblica de California
22×2,939 Posts |
Quote:
Since I'm mainly interested in code-dev (as opposed to 24/7 crunching), any chance of renting (we could negotiate a suitable incentives package of furs, gunsand liquor offline) of a guest account on your system? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Bamboozled!
"๐บ๐๐ท๐ท๐ญ"
May 2003
Down not across
2×17×347 Posts |
Quote:
Paul |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |||
|
Oct 2007
Manchester, UK
53·11 Posts |
Quote:
Obviously not all systems will suck the same juice, so you'll have to do a little googling on power draw for the various bits inside that you choose, but if you don't really feel like doing that, you can always go for overkill and get a 1000W PSU. Quote:
Quote:
Technically, you COULD get a mini-ITX board or similar (these are tiny). You can get mini-ITX boards that support i7 CPUs and have just one expansion slot on them, but they are made for low power and any half decent graphics card would be bigger than the motherboard. It'd be kind of a ridiculous combination. Here are some mini-ITX i7 boards: http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=68 Last fiddled with by lavalamp on 2010-08-14 at 10:58 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
Repรบblica de California
1175610 Posts |
Thanks, lavalamp - Paul's gonna set me up with an account on his system once he builds it. That's ideal (at least for starters) since I'm interested in coding and building, not using the hardware for gaming or full-time crunching. (If I lived in a colder climate and needed a space heater, I might be more open to buying the hardware).
Will keep y'all posted on progress once we`re up and running ... will likely warm up on the coding front with some trial-factoring code. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Dec 2010
Monticello
5×359 Posts |
http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news...revolution.ars
Do you suppose P95 could get some time on Blue Gene to test how well it works with P95? This is a somewhat fatuous article on transactional memory. I'm not sure why the software overhead is so high; it seems to me that it is just a somewhat different implementation of "lock" semantics. I think you could make it work if you simply guaranteed that every process asking for and using write access got a different value of a locking word...16 bits would suffice unless you are on a massive supercomputer with more than 2^16 threads! |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Basketry That Evening!
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88
160658 Posts |
Man...
Just spent the last hour wikipedia'ing about super computers... Even 150th place would double the entire GIMPS throughput... (http://www.top500.org/list/2011/06/200) |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New PC dedicated to Mersenne Prime Search | Taiy | Hardware | 12 | 2018-01-02 15:54 |
| How would you design a CPU/GPU for prime number crunching? | emily | Hardware | 4 | 2012-02-20 18:46 |
| DSP hardware for number crunching? | ixfd64 | Hardware | 15 | 2011-08-09 01:11 |
| The prime-crunching on dedicated hardware FAQ | jasonp | Hardware | 142 | 2009-11-15 23:20 |
| Optimal Hardware for Dedicated Crunching Computer | Angular | Hardware | 5 | 2004-01-16 12:37 |