The need for multiprocessor builds

So is there really a future for multiprocessor systems in the future. And I mean like Two xeons, not multiple core processing. This subject is quite interesting to me....thoughts.

Definitely.

Rack density.
Power consumption.

I see, so basically having the ability to reduce redundacies in other places besides the CPU. Is this useful in areas besides Servers?

Originally Posted by mikegoes101

Is this useful in areas besides Servers?

I have multiple Dual Processor Systems running Folding@Home.

There are many uses for these types of systems.

We have many dual processor computers at the sheriff dept when i work.

Some are the servers that hold all the databases, other are workstation that are running multiple real time systems that need a lot of processing power.

The main focus is to eliminate or combine hardware where ever possible to lower operating and hardware costs.

Combining hardware also produces software licensing savings (up to a point), especially for Windows clients and servers.

Originally Posted by mikegoes101

So is there really a future for multiprocessor systems in the future. And I mean like Two xeons, not multiple core processing. This subject is quite interesting to me....thoughts.

Most definitively. I run media servers and seeing 8 cores at or near load is nothing for me. In my world of multimedia production I can never have enough CPU power

Originally Posted by mikegoes101

So is there really a future for multiprocessor systems in the future. And I mean like Two xeons, not multiple core processing. This subject is quite interesting to me....thoughts.

I would say yes

just from a somewhat "primitive" example:

say you have XYZ CPU thats got N-cores and is the "limit" of technology at release, its already going to be an SMP as far as software is concerned, so if you have software that takes advantage of that, it doesn't care what the physical arrangement looks like (And if the software doesn't take advantage, it still doesn't care, and it also doesn't scale)

so instead of having to wait X months for either >N-cores or cores that are more efficient, you could simply buy two or four or eight of XYZ CPU and have 2-8x N-cores at the "limit" of technology at that same time period (should've mentioned earlier, this is all ceteris paribus) which can provide a considerable advantage if you have an application that can take advantage of SMP

OTOH:

density/power savings is another advantage, instead of having two complete systems with XYZ CPU with N-cores, you can have a single complete system with 2 XYZ CPUs with N-cores, which will use somewhat less power (as many things are redundant in the two system example, like disk drives, cooling fans, storage, network, video, and audio controllers, etc) and take up less space (you could say "half as much", but that may not be reflective of real-world scenarios, however a DP 1U is better than two SP 1Us, for example) both of these factors are advantages if you're going to have 50 or 100 of the same machine for whatever purpose (because you need less power and less physical space to accommodate roughly the same compute power)

I think to answer your question regarding "anywhere besides Servers?" would be better phrased as "anything found in the home?", to which I'd probably say no, the days of a dual AthlonMP or Xeon MP box being an enthusiast system are long gone, and for the vast majority of home users a DC or QC chip is just dandy, for commerical/industrial power users though, multi-socket boxes will always provide some advantages (and then of course theres just the hardware-nuts out there who want the best and pay to have it )

Originally Posted by DeChache

Most definitively. I run media servers and seeing 8 cores at or near load is nothing for me. In my world of multimedia production I can never have enough CPU power

so you're saying that if we pooled together and bought you a BlueGene based cluster or some equally monstrous system, it would still be insufficient for your compute needs? (whats sad is in like 15 years this will probably actually be true for the average consumer, if history is any indication of the future)

Originally Posted by obobski

so you're saying that if we pooled together and bought you a BlueGene based cluster or some equally monstrous system, it would still be insufficient for your compute needs? (whats sad is in like 15 years this will probably actually be true for the average consumer, if history is any indication of the future)

Ever since the production groups switched to HD it seems that way.

But then again its mainly my trans-coding servers that see all the load. But I'm supporting a whole campus with 2 servers. The whole live class capture thing is catching on here and my servers trans-code to live stream and achieved web casts on the fly.

@DeChache: Sounds like an interesting setup...

As home automation technology increase, you will likely find more and more homes with dual processor boxes in them. I just setup an ESXi based DP server to be used a media, security, automation server for a ski house here in Maine. (some ski house.. guys 3rd home, is 8000sq/ft)

Originally Posted by mikegoes101

I see, so basically having the ability to reduce redundacies in other places besides the CPU. Is this useful in areas besides Servers?

Multiple processors has absolutely nothing to do with redundancy, if you are using the accepted definition of redundancy (IE: Failover). There is no such thing as redundant CPU's in any platform.

Servers use multiple CPU's mostly for higher threads, whether it's for large database applications or any other simultaneous requesting application (high volume web servers, ESX farms, etc...)

Originally Posted by jrdonnaruma

(some ski house.. guys 3rd home, is 8000sq/ft)

What does he do for a living?!

I multiprocessor builds will become more popular once software starts using multiple cores more effectively and more dual CPU consumer oriented motherboards come out (if that ever happens).

Not sure what the guy did for a living. Was pretty rich though. I had fun building the automation and theater systems in the house.

But I personally use multiple processor systems for some of my network testing applications and some coding

Originally Posted by BBA

Multiple processors has absolutely nothing to do with redundancy, if you are using the accepted definition of redundancy (IE: Failover). There is no such thing as redundant CPU's in any platform.

Servers use multiple CPU's mostly for higher threads, whether it's for large database applications or any other simultaneous requesting application (high volume web servers, ESX farms, etc...)

He wasn't talking about providing redundancy (as in adding reliability). He was talking about reducing redundancies, as in removing extra components you'd need if you had two systems vs a single system with two or more physical processors to do the same thing. Its a cost issue, pure and simple. Two Xeons in a dual-CPU rig cost less to build and operate than the same two Xeons in two separate boxes. Simple.