[iamrahul]

Can anybody please specify for sure as to whether the latest version of Ansys CFD package and especially Ansys Forte has AVX 512 support or only AVX2.


thank you so much

[iamrahul]

Originally Posted by patriciabrown

Ansys Forte has AVX 512 support.

THANK YOU SO MUCH

i am really grateful for your reply.Every day i have been checking the forum.
Thank you for reaching out to me. your info is crucial to the build i intend. No one could give me a reply directly on this issue even on the Ansys forum.

[flotus1]

Just a heads-up: the answer you got there is from a spam-bot. I.e. it contains no useful information for you.

May I ask why the question of AVX512 support is so important for your decision-making? We might be able to tackle that question from a different angle.

[iamrahul]

Originally Posted by flotus1

Just a heads-up: the answer you got there is from a spam-bot. I.e. it contains no useful information for you.

May I ask why the question of AVX512 support is so important for your decision-making? We might be able to tackle that question from a different angle.

oh sorry i thought someone replied



the thing is i am stuck between dual rank ram based 10920x @ 3200 mhz /10900k@4000mhz choice in my budget constrained build. As of this moment Ansys forte is purely optimized for MKL. AMD 3xxx threadrippers and Epys are out of my budget. Also the MKL debug code might or might not provide a reliable solution.


I stand to be corrected.Whatever i have summarized are gleaned from you posts.so its a privilege to receive your touch on my post.


regards

[flotus1]

I think there is a simple solution here: I9-9820x. Or even an I7-9800x.

If AVX-512 should really make a difference in Ansys Forte -which I doubt- you have that.
Supporting an instruction set does not automatically imply that the result is a spectacular performance increase. This is particularly true for AVX-512.
And if AVX-512 should not be utilized, or other bottlenecks are present like in most CFD solvers, you still have the faster CPU, compared to a mainstream desktop SKU with only 2 memory channels.

[iamrahul]

hi
thank you again for your suggestions.

neither 9800x nor 9820x is available here. only options are 9960x and 9980xe in the 9th gen series . I had opted for the 9920x initially but by the time i was ready to buy it was sold out. in fact there are are nearly no x299 motherboards available. (I dont rely on amazon.in for electronics).the new 10th gen motherboards are restricted in msi x299 pro (within the budget) and the exorbitant x299 creator which costs same as an i5 pc system in whole.what i gleaned from our suggestion was to stick with the x299 platform and a maximum of 12 cores following your dictum of max 2-3 cores per memory channel beyond which there exists a bottleneck for more cores with memory bandwidth. But strangely on passmark site 10980xe shows a performance/price ratio of 41.9 as compared to 38.4 for the 10920x.
So do you think this configuration will do?


1. 10920x or 10980xe(for brute force)

2. quad rank 32gb*4 @3600 mhz OR dual rank 16gb*4 @3200 (please advise-my mesh size would fit in even 32 gb Ram-but since min dual rank is needed-only next option is 16*4)
3.msi x299 pro (new 256gb model)
4.GT-1030 gpu
5.970 evo plus 500gb NVMe


Thank you again

[arpiruk]

Hi Rahul


How did your build went ?

I hoped you chose 10920 and save some for the GPU.
GTX1030 is too poor for your setting. GTX1660 is the sweet spot for budget built.