CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > FLUENT

hardware for fluent

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 13, 2001, 05:30
Default hardware for fluent
  #1
Christian
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear fluent users,

we're about to order new hardware for our fluent simulations. I've followed the discussions about hardware in this forum and decided to go for a dual Xeon 2 GHz with 2 GB of PC800 RDRAM from Dell. We want to run Fluent under Linux, but in Europe Dell sells its machines with Windows only. Now comes the point which puzzles me: in the US you can order machines with Linux preinstalled from Dell. If you choose Linux as OS you can order only Xeon CPUs up to 1.7 GHz. If you choose Windows XP or 2000 you're allowed to choose Xeons with 2 GHz. So far I didn't get any information from Dell, what's the reason for this. Neither could I find any information, if you can install a recent release of Suse or Redhat on a system with the i860 chipset and two Xeons with 2GHz without running into problems. Anybody out there who is using such a machine under Linux or understands the sales strategy of Dell?

thanks for helping, Christian
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 13, 2001, 08:36
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #2
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I don't know about the 2GHz, I can however give you some advice concerning the Precision 530 - we have evaluated a dual CPU 1.7GHz 530 for a few months. It runs Fluent very well. RedHat 7.1 installed without any problems (we also could not order it with Linux factory installed). We haven't tried 7.2 yet but will do soon. You have to get an unofficial Fluent release from your support office though to run on RedHat 7.1 - the last official release doesn't work on 7.1, but they have a fixed version which I'm sure they will give you if you ask.

About graphics - we tested both the Quadro and the Fire-GL cards and I'd definitely recommend the Quadro. The Quadro is more robust once you install the latest drivers from nvidia.

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 14, 2001, 06:14
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #3
Christian
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thank you Jonas! Installing Linux on a dual Xeon 2GHz doesn't give any problems, as I found another company selling exactly this configuration with Linux preinstalled. Maybe it's just MS-friendly marketing of Dell...?!
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 15, 2001, 18:36
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #4
John
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
A fiend of me still had problems with last release of fluent (for the newest glibc). I'd prefer to wait for fluent6.

Why xeons ?
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 16, 2001, 03:45
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #5
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Fluent has an unofficial 5.7 version which runs very well on RedHat 7.1.

Xeons because you can get a dual-CPU motherboard with 4GB RDRAM with them.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 17, 2001, 11:55
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #6
Peter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Jonas:

Could you comment on Linux vs W2k I am running Fluent on W2k without any problems. What would be the advantages of switching to Linux? speed? stability? Linux vs W2k price? easy to use, user friendly? ???

Thanks Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 19, 2001, 07:50
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #7
kim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
According to our experience running Fluent on Linux is faster than on Win2000 for both one and two processor case (for two processors is the speedup even bigger).Does anybody have different experience ?
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 19, 2001, 08:15
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #8
Jonas Larsson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I have very limited experience from Fluent on W2K (I have tried it once). In any case I don't think that there is a big difference, the windows version of fluent used to be more buggy but I have heard that they have sorted out most problems by now. The speed is similar - about a year ago the windows version was slightly faster on single CPU and scaled slightly worse on multiple CPUs. This was on PIII, I don't know if this is still true for the P4.

The main advantage with linux is that it integrates very well with a larger compute environment. We have a linux-cluster with 150 CPUs and we have many UNIX workstations. With linux we can easily log into and use whichever computer we want. Running W2k in this environment would be much less convenient.

In a single user single-machine environment W2K is probably an equally good choice though - chose the OS that you prefer to work with yourself.

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 21, 2001, 17:35
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #9
john
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It was fluent5.7 (the unofficial version) and it did not work on suse7.1 or 7.2 (sorry, don't know exact..)

Dualboard ? ok. Did you also test a network-cluster with the "normal" P4-cpu.? Isn't it much cheaper than a dual-board, and in a year or two, you can also upgrade the single-pc with a faster "normal" cpu or put the the hardware on your table for word and excel and buy a new small cluster ?
  Reply With Quote

Old   December 3, 2001, 17:05
Default Re: hardware for fluent
  #10
Martin Bowers
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I don't think this is vendor specifid, but I have experienced some problems with Fluent and W2K. I was trying to run 8 different machines and almost every attempt (say 9/10) a random machine out of the 8 would not connect.

I'm not positive this is the ultimate reason but based on limited research at msn.com it seemed to me a max of 10 connections are permitted at one time by any machine if you only have W2K workstation and not W2K server. I don't know how much more money you have to give Bill Gates to get Server over the Workstation version. So you're limited to a max of 10 CPUs theoretically in parallel, assuming no machine is talking to anything else on the network but the other CFD slaves, but practically even getting 8 CPUs going at once was a little painful.

Didn't really compare speed up to serial because the case was too big for any one machine's memory. At least once it was going, (ie 1/10 times) I could launch all kinds of jobs without shutting down Fluent. If this same problem applies to CFX, launching parallel will be even less reliable since it has to reconnect to every machine for every job. But I haven't pushed CFX to more than 4 processors yet so I can't say it's had a fair trial yet.

Overall I think this is just another reason to run Linux over W2K for CFD.
  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hardware required to model sediment dynamics in rivers using SSIIM lindsaywestraadt Hardware 0 August 12, 2010 11:18
Looking for a pimpleFoam tutorial using Salome (and hardware recommendations?) madact OpenFOAM 1 May 27, 2010 01:24
Hardware recommendation? AMD X2, Phenom, Core2Duo, Quadcore? rparks OpenFOAM 0 April 22, 2009 09:10
CFD Online Down due to Hardware Failure CFD Online Team Main CFD Forum 2 November 19, 2007 06:06
hardware Guus Jacobs Main CFD Forum 24 May 3, 2000 16:42


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:22.