| Best platform for IDL 6.2? [message #46364] |
Tue, 15 November 2005 18:15  |
bas
Messages: 6
Registered: November 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi group:
I was curious what platform seems to be the best for running IDL. I
have read some of the topics and it seems some platforms have problems.
Currently I run a Apple with OS10.4. I was thinking of upgrading to a
Sun or SGI workstation. I just wanted some opinions and any
experiences you have had with IDL on your platforms.
Thanks
bas
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best platform for IDL 6.2? [message #46615 is a reply to message #46364] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 05:44  |
Wolf Schweitzer
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2001
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I have experience running IDL under Mac OS X on Dual G5 Powermac, under
OS X on various G4-configs (Powerbook, Powermacs), we currently run IDL
also under AIX on an IBM Intellistation 275, and I'm at this moment
waiting for a 2xproc-AMD-Opteron-254 machine (I ordered a Fujitsu
Siemens Celsius v830 to replace my old G4 Powermac at home) that I'll
set up with Linux and IDL.
I like Mac OS X for it's desktop productivity and seamlessness, and I
like it as X-Windows-Client - but Mac OS X does not have full 64-bit
capability (so you can't get IDL to run more than 2GB-processes) and
even a Dual-Processor G5 Powermac is considerably slower than, say, an
IBM Notebook or a cheap Acer Veriton desktop computer (which we tried in
evaluating our options). In terms of it's performance, even fast Macs
really are too slow for the price they cost. It terms of combined
desktop software-productivity and hardware, Mac OS X is luxuriously nice.
Our IBM workstation contains PowerPC-processors (two dualcore
Power4-processors), so that's basically the same as the G5-processors
(also produced by IBM). While to no surprise the IDL stuff doesn't
really run much faster on the IBM workstation than on the G5 (the little
Apple brothers of the same processor), the 64-bit capability with the 12
GB RAM really, really, really make a big difference (volume data ranging
between 400MB-9GB) - so it is possible to work with a lot more data.
Currently, I prefer to work on IDL on the IBM workstation, and simply
FTP any data on/from it from the Mac.
My colleague (who shares the workstation with me; we both probably use
it ~ 20-30% of the time at the moment) and I both use X-windows to
access this workstation, and it's a really useful setup. However,
installing other packages (The Gimp, ..) under Unix may require a lot
more patience than installing software on an Apple Macintosh computer,
depending on the type of software (even though some is really simple rpm
-i .. stuff not worth worrying about).
Currently I would recommend getting any machine that runs AMD
64-bit-processors under Linux (or if you like Windows...) and an IDL
license for that type of machine (have you checked
http://www.monarchcomputer.com - that is where I would shop if I was in
the USA). If your "desktop productivity does require" (i.e. "your
finances allow") an additional Mac OS X, you could maybe get the slowest
Mac that still does what you need it to do - like a smaller G4 Powerbok,
a G4 iBook, or maybe an iMac G5 as they look trendy; currently I'd wait
until January to see what's up with Apple. I would not get Sun (like
Apple, too expensive for the performance), or SGI (..), and I'd
definitely stay away from Windows unless you are absolutely sure you
need Windows for other reasons. I'm sure Apple has the potential to
release some wonderfully fast machines running a full 64-bit-OS and IDL
at a prime speed in, maybe, mid 2007 - it's only that they're not there yet.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best platform for IDL 6.2? [message #46697 is a reply to message #46615] |
Mon, 05 December 2005 15:16 |
JD Smith
Messages: 850
Registered: December 1999
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:44:25 +0100, Wolf Schweitzer wrote:
> I have experience running IDL under Mac OS X on Dual G5 Powermac, under OS
> X on various G4-configs (Powerbook, Powermacs), we currently run IDL also
> under AIX on an IBM Intellistation 275, and I'm at this moment waiting for
> a 2xproc-AMD-Opteron-254 machine (I ordered a Fujitsu Siemens Celsius v830
> to replace my old G4 Powermac at home) that I'll set up with Linux and
> IDL.
>
> I like Mac OS X for it's desktop productivity and seamlessness, and I like
> it as X-Windows-Client - but Mac OS X does not have full 64-bit capability
> (so you can't get IDL to run more than 2GB-processes) and even a
> Dual-Processor G5 Powermac is considerably slower than, say, an IBM
> Notebook or a cheap Acer Veriton desktop computer (which we tried in
> evaluating our options). In terms of it's performance, even fast Macs
> really are too slow for the price they cost. It terms of combined desktop
> software-productivity and hardware, Mac OS X is luxuriously nice.
The reason IDL under OSX on PowerPC is so slow compared to Intel is
the GCC compiler used, which has poorer optimizations for this chip
family. A dual G5 should easily hold its own against dual AMD setups,
were it not for this compiler gap. The PowerPC chips have very good
floating point performance, which dominates IDL benchmarks (they also
have relatively weaker integer performance, which is why AMD/Intel can
dominate in "office" type applications). That, and of course the
underutilized but powerful Altivec optimization, explain why G5 duals
dominate in Photoshop benchmarks. If RSI had Adobe engineers
optimizing their code for Macs, they could easily outperform X86
hardware. Of course, this is all a moot point, because starting
sometime in 2006, Macs will be running Intel, and Linux vs. Windows
vs. Mac on IDL will be much less interesting. I expect Linux and OSX
performance to be very similar on similar hardware at that point, as
they'll be using the exact same compiler targeting the exact same
instruction set.
JD
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
