| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
 |
|
Menu
| Electronic Schematics (alt.binaries.schematics.electronic) A place to show and share your electronics schematic drawings. |
| Reply |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
| Electronic Schematics (alt.binaries.schematics.electronic) A place to show and share your electronics schematic drawings. |
| Reply |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine
is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice  480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#2
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 12:16 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory Other possibly than the memory size, what makes you think you need to upgrade? The main reason why I feel I need a fast computer is because the browsers keep sucking more and more MHz. Otherwise the software I use all runs just fine on older machines. -- Rick |
|
#3
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 12:16 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson I have a very nice 16-core Opteron machine that I'm very happy with. Apart from needing the PSU replaced a year or so back, it's been running flawlessly for about 4-1/2 years, and it has a lot of stooch (150 Gflops peak). The details a Supermicro tower server with 2 AMD Opteron Magny-Cours 8-core processors, 32 GB of RAM, 4x 1 TB HDDs CentOS 6.4 Linux, with Win 7 Pro 64 bit and Win XP 32-bit in KVM virtual machines 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 Supermicro Chassis 733TQ 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 SUPERMICRO H8DGI OR H8DGI-F 1 pc Adaptec 6405 RAID controller board 1 pc XFX ATI Radeon HD6670 1 GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI PCI-Express Video Card HD667XZHF3 2 pcs CFN-OTH-AC170 2 OPTERON COOLING FAN 2 pcs AMD OPTERON 6128 8-CORE 16 TOTAL CORES 8 pcs MM3-KIN-4G133ER KINGSTON 4GB DDR3 ECC REGISTERED CL9 1.35-1.5V (32gb of ram installed) 4 pcs HDA-WDC-WD1002F WDC RE4 1TB CDW-LGE-22XSATA 1 pc GOLDSTAR DVDRW 22X GH22NS30 Since AMD has kind of stumbled since Magny Cours (Bulldozer and Piledriver were dogs), you might want to use Intel instead, but the Supermicro systems are tops. The whole thing was about $3800 from a highish-class reseller, Alvio, whom I've dealt with a few times and like very well. (Tell Aleksandr I said 'Hi.") Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net |
|
#4
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs
wrote: [snip] I have a very nice 16-core Opteron machine that I'm very happy with. Apart from needing the PSU replaced a year or so back, it's been running flawlessly for about 4-1/2 years, and it has a lot of stooch (150 Gflops peak). The details a Supermicro tower server with 2 AMD Opteron Magny-Cours 8-core processors, 32 GB of RAM, 4x 1 TB HDDs CentOS 6.4 Linux, with Win 7 Pro 64 bit and Win XP 32-bit in KVM virtual machines 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 Supermicro Chassis 733TQ 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 SUPERMICRO H8DGI OR H8DGI-F 1 pc Adaptec 6405 RAID controller board 1 pc XFX ATI Radeon HD6670 1 GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI PCI-Express Video Card HD667XZHF3 2 pcs CFN-OTH-AC170 2 OPTERON COOLING FAN 2 pcs AMD OPTERON 6128 8-CORE 16 TOTAL CORES 8 pcs MM3-KIN-4G133ER KINGSTON 4GB DDR3 ECC REGISTERED CL9 1.35-1.5V (32gb of ram installed) 4 pcs HDA-WDC-WD1002F WDC RE4 1TB CDW-LGE-22XSATA 1 pc GOLDSTAR DVDRW 22X GH22NS30 Since AMD has kind of stumbled since Magny Cours (Bulldozer and Piledriver were dogs), you might want to use Intel instead, but the Supermicro systems are tops. The whole thing was about $3800 from a highish-class reseller, Alvio, whom I've dealt with a few times and like very well. (Tell Aleksandr I said 'Hi.") Cheers Phil Hobbs Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#5
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? A lot of that depends on how you work. I have friends who are perpetually upgrading -- trying to eek out the last epsilon of performance, never considering the time spent in the upgrade process (reinstallling software and then reconfiguring it for the various "options"/preferences you had); nor the "losses" that come with it (e.g., peripherals and applications that no longer work). But, if you look at their work process, they sit and *watch* their machine, waiting for it to cough up a result. So, in their minds, every increase in performance (if not counteracted by inefficiencies in software "upgrades") is a net improvement. OTOH, I prefer to wait a bit for each action I expect from my machines. This gives me time to reorganize my thoughts: what will I do *when* the machine is finished? what is my next priority? how will I verify that the machine has done what I expected of it? etc. Likewise, if the time involved is "more than a cup of tea", I can move to another machine (or chore) and make some progress there. No need to sit and wait for a machine to do the job it *will* perform. So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") |
|
#6
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 2:08 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote: [snip] I have a very nice 16-core Opteron machine that I'm very happy with. Apart from needing the PSU replaced a year or so back, it's been running flawlessly for about 4-1/2 years, and it has a lot of stooch (150 Gflops peak). The details a Supermicro tower server with 2 AMD Opteron Magny-Cours 8-core processors, 32 GB of RAM, 4x 1 TB HDDs CentOS 6.4 Linux, with Win 7 Pro 64 bit and Win XP 32-bit in KVM virtual machines 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 Supermicro Chassis 733TQ 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 SUPERMICRO H8DGI OR H8DGI-F 1 pc Adaptec 6405 RAID controller board 1 pc XFX ATI Radeon HD6670 1 GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI PCI-Express Video Card HD667XZHF3 2 pcs CFN-OTH-AC170 2 OPTERON COOLING FAN 2 pcs AMD OPTERON 6128 8-CORE 16 TOTAL CORES 8 pcs MM3-KIN-4G133ER KINGSTON 4GB DDR3 ECC REGISTERED CL9 1.35-1.5V (32gb of ram installed) 4 pcs HDA-WDC-WD1002F WDC RE4 1TB CDW-LGE-22XSATA 1 pc GOLDSTAR DVDRW 22X GH22NS30 Since AMD has kind of stumbled since Magny Cours (Bulldozer and Piledriver were dogs), you might want to use Intel instead, but the Supermicro systems are tops. The whole thing was about $3800 from a highish-class reseller, Alvio, whom I've dealt with a few times and like very well. (Tell Aleksandr I said 'Hi.") Cheers Phil Hobbs Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? ...Jim Thompson Dunno, I haven't needed to buy . Beautiful Layout Hunchback has a Core i7 quad machine (Win 7) that she likes, also purchased from Alvio. Given that it's your daily tool, I suggest finding a good VAR and taking their advice. It'll cost a bit more, but you're likely to be happy with the results. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net |
|
#7
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend) The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have. You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy  Cheers |
|
#8
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:34:42 -0400, Martin Riddle
wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend) The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have. You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy Cheers Floppy is not an issue... I long ago copied all my 5.25" and 3.5" stuff onto CD's fearing those drives would fail sooner or later. What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#9
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:52:57 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:34:42 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend) The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have. You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy Cheers Floppy is not an issue... I long ago copied all my 5.25" and 3.5" stuff onto CD's fearing those drives would fail sooner or later. What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile? ...Jim Thompson And 64-bit versus 32-bit? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#10
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:52:57 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:34:42 -0400, Martin Riddle wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend) The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have. You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy Cheers Floppy is not an issue... I long ago copied all my 5.25" and 3.5" stuff onto CD's fearing those drives would fail sooner or later. What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile? ...Jim Thompson Which Spice are you running and can it support more than one core (thread)? Like LTSpice supports multiple threads. It greatly speeds things up on large designs. How many? how deep are your pockets At least 4, most Intels are 4 cores. The I7's are fast at 3.0GHz. But the Xeons are designed to crunch numbers and are perfered for CAD work. Look at the dell 7810, with a Xeon E5-2623 it's just shy of $2K Their onsite service is great, we have 4 5 year old 3500's at work and one was reparied nextday without a hitch. Be sure to use the business side of dell. Cheers |
|
#11
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 15:36:09 -0400, Martin Riddle
wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:52:57 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: [snip] What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile? ...Jim Thompson Which Spice are you running and can it support more than one core (thread)? PSpice mostly, single thread, but I use LTspice on occasion to help clients. Like LTSpice supports multiple threads. It greatly speeds things up on large designs. How many? how deep are your pockets I'll probably buy two machines. Medium pockets ;-) At least 4, most Intels are 4 cores. The I7's are fast at 3.0GHz. But the Xeons are designed to crunch numbers and are perfered for CAD work. Look at the dell 7810, with a Xeon E5-2623 it's just shy of $2K Their onsite service is great, we have 4 5 year old 3500's at work and one was reparied nextday without a hitch. Be sure to use the business side of dell. Cheers ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#12
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
|
|
#13
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
Jim Thompson wrote:
Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? Xeon. After them i7. But verify if the sw you're using is OpenCL compliant, if yes, then go get a good video card, because the sw can use the GPU for number crunching. Bye Jack -- Yoda of Borg am I! Assimilated shall you be! Futile resistance is, hmm? |
|
#14
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 02/08/2015 19:19, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 8/2/2015 2:08 PM, Jim Thompson wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote: [snip] I have a very nice 16-core Opteron machine that I'm very happy with. Apart from needing the PSU replaced a year or so back, it's been running flawlessly for about 4-1/2 years, and it has a lot of stooch (150 Gflops peak). The details a Supermicro tower server with 2 AMD Opteron Magny-Cours 8-core processors, 32 GB of RAM, 4x 1 TB HDDs CentOS 6.4 Linux, with Win 7 Pro 64 bit and Win XP 32-bit in KVM virtual machines 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 Supermicro Chassis 733TQ 1 pc ACC-3C0-3C13685 SUPERMICRO H8DGI OR H8DGI-F 1 pc Adaptec 6405 RAID controller board 1 pc XFX ATI Radeon HD6670 1 GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI PCI-Express Video Card HD667XZHF3 2 pcs CFN-OTH-AC170 2 OPTERON COOLING FAN 2 pcs AMD OPTERON 6128 8-CORE 16 TOTAL CORES 8 pcs MM3-KIN-4G133ER KINGSTON 4GB DDR3 ECC REGISTERED CL9 1.35-1.5V (32gb of ram installed) 4 pcs HDA-WDC-WD1002F WDC RE4 1TB CDW-LGE-22XSATA 1 pc GOLDSTAR DVDRW 22X GH22NS30 Since AMD has kind of stumbled since Magny Cours (Bulldozer and Piledriver were dogs), you might want to use Intel instead, but the Supermicro systems are tops. The whole thing was about $3800 from a highish-class reseller, Alvio, whom I've dealt with a few times and like very well. (Tell Aleksandr I said 'Hi.") Cheers Phil Hobbs Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? ...Jim Thompson Dunno, I haven't needed to buy . Beautiful Layout Hunchback has a Core i7 quad machine (Win 7) that she likes, also purchased from Alvio. Given that it's your daily tool, I suggest finding a good VAR and taking their advice. It'll cost a bit more, but you're likely to be happy with the results. Win7 is still preferable though leave it another year or so and Win 10 may have bedded down. Avoid Win8 unless you like pain. A slightly devious approach is to look at machines favoured by the local 3D gaming community and persuade the supplier to build you one *without* the high performance graphics card. i7 2D graphics are as fast as dedicated cards. Unless you want 3D gaming you can live without. There is a big power saving to be had there too. A good heuristic is to choose a CPU that is just behind the bleeding edge and offers the best or nearly the best bang per buck for the sorts of thing you are doing. You can't have enough ram for simulations. It depends a bit on your local market. If I was buying today price no object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it. Check local reviews for reliability and build quality. Clocked normally the thing will be fast and don't waste your money on super fast ram like I did improvement is marginal. A fast agile SSD for scratch files and most frequently used programs is very worthwhile. Not convinced by the Intel smart SSD cache of a big disk. Mine died permanently after about two years flawless operation. I live without it since major work files live on the Samsung SSD (consider also Crucial). (on the plus side no data was lost when it pegged out) Beware of makers that game the benchmarks! -- Regards, Martin Brown |
|
#15
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote:
On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? [snip] So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") Just anticipating _very_ aged equipment croaking at an inopportune moment. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#16
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
"Jack" wrote in message ...
Xeon. After them i7. But verify if the sw you're using is OpenCL compliant, if yes, then go get a good video card, because the sw can use the GPU for number crunching. Is there even *any* SPICE that's GPU-enabled, yet? LTSpice is SMP, which is, sad to say: decades ahead of the curve. Considering everyone else is stuck in 1981, or whenever it was XSPICE was released. NI/Multisim, Altium, PSpice(?), take your pick... (NgSpice?) They're all based on that one (free, coincidentally!) SPICE core. Short of it is, more than two CPU cores (or a fancy GPU, beyond good 2D and good enough 3D performance) doesn't buy you much in EDA these days. Kind of a bizarre inversion, historically speaking: EDA and CAD used to be the prime driver behind top-of-the-line workstations. 'Course, they cost $100k back then, too. It's been my experience that the mid-level software companies (~$10k/license and down) have been strangely resistant to any kind of advancement or refinement of this sort. Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs, LLC Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com |
|
#17
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 4:02 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote: So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") Just anticipating _very_ aged equipment croaking at an inopportune moment. I've always maintained a hot spare of every system I've used. If something crashes, I can be up and running on another machine within a matter of hours -- or less. Hardware is cheap. And, if you work like I do (move on to something else instead of waiting for a machine to finish), the "spare" just facilitates that. |
|
#18
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote:
On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? A lot of that depends on how you work. I have friends who are perpetually upgrading -- trying to eek out the last epsilon of performance, never considering the time spent in the upgrade process (reinstallling software and then reconfiguring it for the various "options"/preferences you had); nor the "losses" that come with it (e.g., peripherals and applications that no longer work). But, if you look at their work process, they sit and *watch* their machine, waiting for it to cough up a result. So, in their minds, every increase in performance (if not counteracted by inefficiencies in software "upgrades") is a net improvement. OTOH, I prefer to wait a bit for each action I expect from my machines. This gives me time to reorganize my thoughts: what will I do *when* the machine is finished? what is my next priority? how will I verify that the machine has done what I expected of it? etc. Likewise, if the time involved is "more than a cup of tea", I can move to another machine (or chore) and make some progress there. No need to sit and wait for a machine to do the job it *will* perform. So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. I got a new PC on Friday, and I'm going through the awful process of installing all my existing apps and settings and projects and desktop stuff. Old HP XP, new monster Win7 Dell with 4x the ram, 30x the disk, gobs of horsepower. Such a trauma is worth it every 3 years or so, certainly not much more often. In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") I occasionally run a Spice sim on the old 5-year-old HP that take many minutes per run, so design iterations are slow. That's about the slowest thing I do, and most circuit sims take a second or two. I can spin a SolidWorks 3D model essentially instantly. Doing a design rules check on a big PC board might take 10 seconds, so I don't often need more compute power. Webbing is connection speed limited. Why does Microsoft keep changing the way Windows works, for no apparent reason? Most annoying. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com |
|
#19
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/2/2015 5:46 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote: On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. I got a new PC on Friday, and I'm going through the awful process of installing all my existing apps and settings and projects and desktop stuff. Old HP XP, new monster Win7 Dell with 4x the ram, 30x the disk, gobs of horsepower. Such a trauma is worth it every 3 years or so, certainly not much more often. For a "trivial (windows) machine" (e.g., something that just does word processing, web browsing, email, etc.) it usually takes me the better part of three days to get a new machine set up and configured. Rarely do you just reinstall all the same (old) apps: "Hmmm.... should I upgrade Firefox? And, what about the tool that I use to view ISO's? And what's the latest set of Adobe Reader bugs? ..." My *work* machines take *weeks* to set up! Invariably, something that used to work doesn't any longer. So, time spent (wasted) researching the "why" behind it. Then, deciding if I should "live without" that thing -- or, *risk* upgrading it and hope it doesn't break anything else in the process... I firmly believe in living with a known set of problems and capabilities instead of seeking out a whole new set! Most of the time, the machine is sitting in a tight loop waiting for me to decide which *key* I'm going to press... I sure as hell don't need to install "updates" every week and wonder what won't work thereafter -- and *when* I will discover the problem! (most updates are security related; keep machine off the internet and all those problems go away!) In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") I occasionally run a Spice sim on the old 5-year-old HP that take many minutes per run, so design iterations are slow. That's about the slowest thing I do, and most circuit sims take a second or two. I can spin a SolidWorks 3D model essentially instantly. Doing a design rules Spinning a model is simple. Photorealistically *rendering* it from a wireframe eats cycles. (I have models of things where you can actually see the detail of the "legs" of components/DIPs in the final model) check on a big PC board might take 10 seconds, so I don't often need more compute power. Webbing is connection speed limited. Why does Microsoft keep changing the way Windows works, for no apparent reason? Most annoying. Why "new coke"? Why "new and improved" ANYTHING? Esp when the "improvement" rarely *is*! If Windows Y was the same as Windows X, who would buy Y? What I found most amusing is reading the numerous papers MSweenies publish touting the rationale behind all of their decisions -- esp user interface decisions! Then, reading the counterparts to those papers at the NEXT release... wherein they have an entirely different rationale for an entirely different user interface dogma! :-/ |
|
#20
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote: Win7 is still preferable though leave it another year or so and Win 10 may have bedded down. Avoid Win8 unless you like pain. Win 8.1 can be made somewhat less awful by making it look like Win 7 using Classic Shell: http://www.classicshell.net That brings back the real start menu, ease of adding shortcut icons to the desktop, and explorer usability. I can totally ignore the page of wiggly icons that MS calls a start page. If I was buying today price no object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it. Agreed. I haven't seen a bad Intel CPU in probably 15 years, while I've lost count of the dead or erratic AMD CPU's that have I've had to deal with. I would go with a 4th or 5th generation i7. The i7-4790k is about $330 and burns about 45 watts, while the i7-5960x is $1,000 and burns 140 watts. That should make the decision easy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors A fast agile SSD for scratch files and most frequently used programs is very worthwhile. In general, an SSD is 3x to 5x faster than rotating memory for everything. I'm partial to Samsung 850 EVO and Pro. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372 Most SSD drives have similar read speeds. However, the write speeds is what makes the difference. There are benchmark tests all over the internet. Don't overbuy on capacity as the prices of SSD drives are still dropping and you can probably do better if you wait until you need the space. Not convinced by the Intel smart SSD cache of a big disk. Mine died permanently after about two years flawless operation. I live without it since major work files live on the Samsung SSD (consider also Crucial). I had problems with a Crucial MX100 512MB. The drive was fine, but no matter what I tried, it would not boot in the designated HP i7 something machine, even with a fresh Win 8 install. However, it worked in another machine (Dell Inspiron 1725) so I kept it. Also, the write speed is slower than a Samsung 850 SSD. I must be leading a charmed life. I've installed (cloned) about 25 assorted SSD drives in the last year. Lately, I'm doing 2 pre-emptive SSD upgrades per week and climbing. Zero failures or irate customers so far and no indications of impending doom. However, I did have some problems with Samsung 840 series which was later fixed with a firmware update. http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/SSD/global/html/support/downloads.html I also had some problems with a user that did not properly shut down his desktop, preferring instead to just switch off the power. He was scrambling data on the SSD until I discovered the power problem. Demonstrating how to operate the power button (i.e. push once to shut down) solved that problem. I don't have any great advice on what to buy. If you want reliability, buy two machines. If you want performance, buy the latest greatest. If you want to save money, buy last years model. If you want reparability, buy an off the shelf Dell workstation. If you want it all, give up now while you're still sane and solvent. Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work, not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
|
#21
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 17:46:29 -0700, John Larkin
wrote: Why does Microsoft keep changing the way Windows works, for no apparent reason? Most annoying. To give the illusion of progress and improvement. If they left the user interface the same, users will think it really is the same and refuse to pay for upgrades. Users will pay for new features and functions, but balk at paying for bug fixes and cleanup. So, any new upgrades that cost money must look and work different in order to sell. Microsoft has apparently recognized the problem and will soon offer a solution. Instead of being a user, you will soon be a subscriber to the MS dollars for updates service. Instead of paying a lump sum for the OS with the machine, you will pay a regular service charge for the honor of using Windoze, much like Office 365. Updates will be "pushed" directly to your machine whenever MS feels the need and without your consent. The good news is that there will no longer be any need for MS to sell bug fixes and tweaks disguised as progress and improvements. It's therefore possible that the annoying user interface changes and "Dungeons and Dragons" program location moves may be at an end. If you don't like the Win 8.1 user interface, I suggest you look at Classic Shell: http://www.classicshell.net -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
|
#22
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
Jim Thompson wrote:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson I see nothing wrong with that setup. Be advised that SP4 has been available (was free when i got it ages ago, hopefully still available). M$ (on disc) sez "For Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional,Windows 2000 Server and Windows 2000 Advanced Server." Guess you know i have been using Win2K since SP2 came out; still use i 90+ percent of time. I use Win7 only for the few sites that "improved" their "user experience", and note that not ONE THING has (visually) changed. |
|
#23
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 03/08/2015 05:54, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown wrote: If I was buying today price no object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it. Agreed. I haven't seen a bad Intel CPU in probably 15 years, while I've lost count of the dead or erratic AMD CPU's that have I've had to deal with. I would go with a 4th or 5th generation i7. The i7-4790k is about $330 and burns about 45 watts, while the i7-5960x is $1,000 and burns 140 watts. That should make the decision easy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors Another thing to experiment with is limiting the number of threads the simulation code is allowed to use. Mine generates more heat and less speed when allowed to use more than 6 threads in heavy computation. It goes IO bandwidth limited after that even with the faster ram A fast agile SSD for scratch files and most frequently used programs is very worthwhile. In general, an SSD is 3x to 5x faster than rotating memory for everything. I'm partial to Samsung 850 EVO and Pro. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372 Most SSD drives have similar read speeds. However, the write speeds is what makes the difference. There are benchmark tests all over the internet. Don't overbuy on capacity as the prices of SSD drives are still dropping and you can probably do better if you wait until you need the space. I have been with Samsung SSDs for a while but I'd still consider Crucial. My requirements are for maximum speed on incompressible data. I avoid the newest models for a few months. Been bitten by early firmware/chipset issues once in the distant past. If you are using it for scratch disk you can go even faster by making a RAID0 array of matched SSDs and accepting doubling the risk of failure. Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work, not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached. The gaming community make quite a good testbed since they want machines that are fast, well specified and reliable enough to overclock. I get a bit of teasing for having machines with daft names but performance has been magnificent. PC companies I buy from have a tendency to go bust after a while since they are usually offering too good value for money. I don't overclock mine and I do add some silicone washers and sound deadening foam here and there because I like my office quiet. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
|
#24
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 02/08/2015 17:16, Jim Thompson wrote:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz Any chance of running CPUZ on it so we know just how slow the thing actually is and what step level and full name of CPU? I suspect its peers are somewhere around this neck of the woods: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html You can get nearly an order of magnitude faster if so. It is generally worth upgrading when the speed gain is 3-5x what you have at present assuming that the PC is regularly loaded to the hilt with work. I generally work on the principle of upgrading a PC every five years these days although I have my previous two both lying around for jobs which require real printer ports, SCSI and other legacy features. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
|
#25
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 2015-08-02, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? "Xeon Phi" FAICT Prolly not what you want. -- \_(ツ)_ |
|
#26
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
Jim Thompson wrote:
Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? Xeon Phi. :-) Best regards, Piotr |
|
#27
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 12:03:42 +0200, Piotr Wyderski
wrote: Jim Thompson wrote: Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel processor for number crunching? Xeon Phi. :-) Best regards, Piotr My first Spice machine was a 386 with 486 co-processor. Looks like the Xeon Phi requires software specifically written for it ?? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
#28
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
Jim Thompson wrote:
My first Spice machine was a 386 with 486 co-processor. Looks like the Xeon Phi requires software specifically written for it ?? In short, yes. The Phi cores themselves are mostly x86-compatible, but the differences are at the upper level: they are shipped as a PCI express card with its own OS (ssh-able). At least the ones I've seen. OTOH, they support OpenCL wery well, so any GPU-aware program would also run smoothly on the Phis. Best regards, Piotr |
|
#29
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
Jim Thompson schreef op 08/02/2015 om 06:16 PM:
I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? I got a Dell 5810 workstation earlier this year with a Xeon CPU, ECC memory and SSD. It's very quiet (I actually had to get used to the absence of noise in my office) and it has been rock solid even with very memory & CPU intensive tasks (routing FPGA designs and compiling large software projects). |
|
#30
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:47:23 -0700, Don Y wrote:
On 8/2/2015 5:46 PM, John Larkin wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote: On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. I got a new PC on Friday, and I'm going through the awful process of installing all my existing apps and settings and projects and desktop stuff. Old HP XP, new monster Win7 Dell with 4x the ram, 30x the disk, gobs of horsepower. Such a trauma is worth it every 3 years or so, certainly not much more often. For a "trivial (windows) machine" (e.g., something that just does word processing, web browsing, email, etc.) it usually takes me the better part of three days to get a new machine set up and configured. Rarely do you just reinstall all the same (old) apps: "Hmmm.... should I upgrade Firefox? And, what about the tool that I use to view ISO's? And what's the latest set of Adobe Reader bugs? ..." My *work* machines take *weeks* to set up! Invariably, something that used to work doesn't any longer. So, time spent (wasted) researching the "why" behind it. Then, deciding if I should "live without" that thing -- or, *risk* upgrading it and hope it doesn't break anything else in the process... I firmly believe in living with a known set of problems and capabilities instead of seeking out a whole new set! Most of the time, the machine is sitting in a tight loop waiting for me to decide which *key* I'm going to press... I sure as hell don't need to install "updates" every week and wonder what won't work thereafter -- and *when* I will discover the problem! (most updates are security related; keep machine off the internet and all those problems go away!) In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") I occasionally run a Spice sim on the old 5-year-old HP that take many minutes per run, so design iterations are slow. That's about the slowest thing I do, and most circuit sims take a second or two. I can spin a SolidWorks 3D model essentially instantly. Doing a design rules Spinning a model is simple. Photorealistically *rendering* it from a wireframe eats cycles. (I have models of things where you can actually see the detail of the "legs" of components/DIPs in the final model) The SolidWorks viewer shows all the surfaces nicely rendered and colored, and does sections so I can see inside things. Things spin about as fast as you could spin the real thing in your hand, on my old HP. I don't run the full SolidWorks, just the viewer. This spins around with no visible delay: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ics/SESM_1.jpg I couldn't spin the real thing as fast: it's big and heavy! check on a big PC board might take 10 seconds, so I don't often need more compute power. Webbing is connection speed limited. Why does Microsoft keep changing the way Windows works, for no apparent reason? Most annoying. Why "new coke"? Why "new and improved" ANYTHING? Esp when the "improvement" rarely *is*! If Windows Y was the same as Windows X, who would buy Y? I would, if it were actually better. Scrambling the UI doesn't make it better, it just makes it annoying. What I found most amusing is reading the numerous papers MSweenies publish touting the rationale behind all of their decisions -- esp user interface decisions! Then, reading the counterparts to those papers at the NEXT release... wherein they have an entirely different rationale for an entirely different user interface dogma! :-/ Windows 10 looks to be yet another disorganized Apple clone, of OS-X this time. X=10, get it? Steve Jobs was Microsoft's best architect. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com |
|
#31
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/3/2015 9:13 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:47:23 -0700, Don Y wrote: On 8/2/2015 5:46 PM, John Larkin wrote: On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:18:17 -0700, Don Y wrote: On 8/2/2015 9:16 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: So, the trick is finding the right amount of "wait" -- too little and you can't get started on something else; too much and you risk the task taking too long for your schedule, etc. I got a new PC on Friday, and I'm going through the awful process of installing all my existing apps and settings and projects and desktop stuff. Old HP XP, new monster Win7 Dell with 4x the ram, 30x the disk, gobs of horsepower. Such a trauma is worth it every 3 years or so, certainly not much more often. For a "trivial (windows) machine" (e.g., something that just does word processing, web browsing, email, etc.) it usually takes me the better part of three days to get a new machine set up and configured. Rarely do you just reinstall all the same (old) apps: "Hmmm.... should I upgrade Firefox? And, what about the tool that I use to view ISO's? And what's the latest set of Adobe Reader bugs? ..." My *work* machines take *weeks* to set up! Invariably, something that used to work doesn't any longer. So, time spent (wasted) researching the "why" behind it. Then, deciding if I should "live without" that thing -- or, *risk* upgrading it and hope it doesn't break anything else in the process... I firmly believe in living with a known set of problems and capabilities instead of seeking out a whole new set! Most of the time, the machine is sitting in a tight loop waiting for me to decide which *key* I'm going to press... I sure as hell don't need to install "updates" every week and wonder what won't work thereafter -- and *when* I will discover the problem! (most updates are security related; keep machine off the internet and all those problems go away!) In the 80's, I had a pair of 25MHz 386's. It would take a full 24 hours to render some of my 3D CAD models. I'd turn off the monitor (save power) and put a note on the keyboard: "Do not turn off" (lest I forget in a moment of distraction). Then, move to the other machine and keep working on mode models, or a schematic, or a layout, or some software, or assembling a prototype, or ordering components, or office supplies, etc. Always *something* that could be done in the time waiting (without it feeling like you're "waiting") I occasionally run a Spice sim on the old 5-year-old HP that take many minutes per run, so design iterations are slow. That's about the slowest thing I do, and most circuit sims take a second or two. I can spin a SolidWorks 3D model essentially instantly. Doing a design rules Spinning a model is simple. Photorealistically *rendering* it from a wireframe eats cycles. (I have models of things where you can actually see the detail of the "legs" of components/DIPs in the final model) The SolidWorks viewer shows all the surfaces nicely rendered and colored, and does sections so I can see inside things. Things spin about as fast as you could spin the real thing in your hand, on my old HP. I don't run the full SolidWorks, just the viewer. Yes, I understand. Its a different thing, entirely, to do full ray tracing, light sources, etc. I.e., I build models that I can "take photos of" and not know that there was no "camera" involved! This spins around with no visible delay: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ics/SESM_1.jpg I couldn't spin the real thing as fast: it's big and heavy! check on a big PC board might take 10 seconds, so I don't often need more compute power. Webbing is connection speed limited. Why does Microsoft keep changing the way Windows works, for no apparent reason? Most annoying. Why "new coke"? Why "new and improved" ANYTHING? Esp when the "improvement" rarely *is*! If Windows Y was the same as Windows X, who would buy Y? I would, if it were actually better. Scrambling the UI doesn't make it better, it just makes it annoying. Exactly. But users only *see* the UI. Joe Average User couldn't describe Windows (any version) in terms other than "a graphical user interface with lots of WINDOWS" What I found most amusing is reading the numerous papers MSweenies publish touting the rationale behind all of their decisions -- esp user interface decisions! Then, reading the counterparts to those papers at the NEXT release... wherein they have an entirely different rationale for an entirely different user interface dogma! :-/ Windows 10 looks to be yet another disorganized Apple clone, of OS-X this time. X=10, get it? Steve Jobs was Microsoft's best architect. OS-X was derived from BSD. |
|
#32
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson My new Dell PC runs Spice about 5x faster than my old HP. HP: Dual core 1.8 GHz Xeon, 2G ram, Win XP, 2 threads in LT Spice Dell: Quadcore 2.8GHz Xeon, 8G ram, 64-bit Win7, 4 threads The hard drives are faster, which may help in Spice too, making huge ..RAW files. |
|
#33
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent should I replace it with? ==================================== Computer Profile Summary Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG) Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM Operating System Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195) Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 128 kilobyte primary memory cache 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 200 megahertz BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004 Drives Memory Modules c,d 137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity 93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K [CD-ROM drive] 3.5" format removeable media [Floppy drive] WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy 1024 Megabytes Installed Memory ...Jim Thompson I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Hillary has the charisma of a steamy warm turd. Jeb Bush has the charisma of a fresh cow-patty. A political contest made to stink :-} |
|
#34
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 11:28:03 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- No, you should make the jump and adapt (with VMware or some other method) or dump the really old 16 bit programs. Most 32 bit stuff will still run. It's time, and it will be the last major change for a very long time. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
|
#35
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On 8/6/2015 11:28 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? No. The advice is to be aware that some things may *not* work as they previously did (esp things that need "drivers" -- like peripherals). Everyone always claims that the upgrade is uneventful -- yet I always seem to end up losing *some* capability along the way (but, I tend to run a very wide variety of software and peripherals -- it's implied that it's *my* fault that I lost some capability that I *should*? have lost previously?). Note that you can choose to run (some) 32b OS's on 64b hardware -- you just lose the benefits of that 64b hardware. You can also run 32b software on a "guest" OS (under VMware, etc.). AND, you can also keep your old machine in a closet for a week or two until you decide it's safe to discard it! : You may be surprised to discover that your "computer experience" isn;t as remarkably faster, cleaner, more efficient than you would have *guessed* (hoped) on that newer/faster machine! : This is called PROGRESS! |
|
#36
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:02:05 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 11:28:03 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- No, you should make the jump and adapt (with VMware or some other method) or dump the really old 16 bit programs. Most 32 bit stuff will still run. It's time, and it will be the last major change for a very long time. --sp Is there any way to tell what type a specific program is? I haven't updated my PSpice since 2003 when OrCAD Crapture and Cadence stopped improving PSpice (simulator) and tried to force everyone onto Crapture :-( ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Hillary has the charisma of a steamy warm turd. Jeb Bush has the charisma of a fresh cow-patty. A political contest guaranteed to stink :-} |
|
#37
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:09:40 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:02:05 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 11:28:03 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- No, you should make the jump and adapt (with VMware or some other method) or dump the really old 16 bit programs. Most 32 bit stuff will still run. It's time, and it will be the last major change for a very long time. --sp Is there any way to tell what type a specific program is? I haven't updated my PSpice since 2003 when OrCAD Crapture and Cadence stopped improving PSpice (simulator) and tried to force everyone onto Crapture :-( ...Jim Thompson I don't know of any method that is certain. I'd say its even worse. One of the 'features' of Windows is that it may work today - but with a 'security update' it may stop working. With diligence you can usually back out of a specific update, but that can become problematic with more and more updates. You may be able to isolate your computer from the web-slime as one alternative. We run some legacy Windows apps that require 32-bit Windows though the machines are 64 bitters. There's one app with a key dialog window that - if you have to use it - causes its calling window to go blank. Backing up several steps then forward one or two solves this (for now). I agree with those who have suggested using virtualization software so you can run particular software packages in cloistered environments, though there can be consequences (e.g. with CPU speed, the display in some circumstances, and possible hardware device interactions). |
|
#38
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
|
|
#39
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:09:40 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:02:05 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 11:28:03 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- No, you should make the jump and adapt (with VMware or some other method) or dump the really old 16 bit programs. Most 32 bit stuff will still run. It's time, and it will be the last major change for a very long time. --sp Is there any way to tell what type a specific program is? I haven't updated my PSpice since 2003 when OrCAD Crapture and Cadence stopped improving PSpice (simulator) and tried to force everyone onto Crapture :-( ...Jim Thompson I think if you open the exe up with a hex editor, and look at x0100, if you see 'PE', then its a portable exe 32bit app. Also if you change the compatibility settings under Win7, it will only list Vista and up if it is 64bit, 32bit apps will show XP 98 95 etc. Cheers |
|
#40
Posted to sci.electronics.design,alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.basics
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time to Upgrade ?:-}
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 22:50:06 -0400, Martin Riddle
wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:09:40 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 15:02:05 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 11:28:03 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: I'm getting the general impression that I should avoid 64-bit to make sure that my legacy programs will still work. Is that correct? ...Jim Thompson -- No, you should make the jump and adapt (with VMware or some other method) or dump the really old 16 bit programs. Most 32 bit stuff will still run. It's time, and it will be the last major change for a very long time. --sp Is there any way to tell what type a specific program is? I haven't updated my PSpice since 2003 when OrCAD Crapture and Cadence stopped improving PSpice (simulator) and tried to force everyone onto Crapture :-( ...Jim Thompson I think if you open the exe up with a hex editor, and look at x0100, if you see 'PE', then its a portable exe 32bit app. Also if you change the compatibility settings under Win7, it will only list Vista and up if it is 64bit, 32bit apps will show XP 98 95 etc. Cheers Thanks, Martin! ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice 480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat || E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| If you will threaten Sherry's pavement from time to time clients, it will consistently travel the protocol. | Metalworking | |||
| Just scheduling from time to time a bathroom in search of the garage is too historic for Joie to glare it. | Electronics Repair | |||
| Atlas Lathe upgrade to QC gearbox, do it right the SECOND time | Metalworking | |||
| Start Part-Time and then Replace your Full Time Income | Woodworking | |||
| Burnt out the table saw motor; replace or upgrade time? | Woodworking | |||
![Jim Thompson[_3_] is offline](https://www.diybanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
