What is Going on with MakerBot’s Acquisition by Stratasys?

Back in June it was announced that Stratasys was acquiring MakerBot. Many of you have been asking about the acquisition and how it impacts Stratasys and PADT. We now have some answers so we thought we would share them with you.

PADT has been involved in what is now called 3D Printing since our founding in 1994. We have seen the technology grow in popularity beyond our core engineering customer base to become a mainstream technology. The addition of MakerBot to the Stratasys family allows us to become more involved in those mainstream applications. Exciting times.

First off, the deal was a stock only transaction worth about $400,000,000, so it does not impact the ability of Stratasys to continue to invest in product growth and improvement. That was great news.

Second, it looks like for now MakerBot will be run as a separate subsidiary of Stratasys, Ltd. At first we were a bit worried about that because we wanted to interact more with the whole MakerBot universe. We soon found out that Stratasys understood this and although marketing, sales, and support are separate, there is some great cross-pollination going on.

PADT received a MakerBot Replicator 2 Desktop 3D Printer a few weeks ago and we have been playing around with it in our Colorado office. Our sales people and engineers are learning as much as they can about the system so we can better explain it to everyone we meet out there who are interested in 3D Printing.

Although we do not sell or support MakerBot products directly, we can now offer access to the MakerBot online store through a PADT link. When you purchase a printer, scanner, material, or parts after using the link, everyone knows you are a friend of PADT and we receive a small commission. We plan on using those funds to help support local 3D printer networking and education activities. And you do not have to be an existing PADT customer or located in our Stratasys sales and support territory. Anyone can purchase through the PADT link.

We will announce events, videos, and articles about MakerBot through our social media outlets and email as they get scheduled.

2013 Cleantech Open Finalists Announced for Rocky Mountain Region

photo

Last week the Rocky Mountain Region of the Cleantech Open announced the three finalists and sustainability award winner that they will be sending to the Cleantech Open Global Forum in San Jose, CA this November to compete for the $200,000 award package. The finalists worked through the regional accelerator with twenty other companies and then competed to come out on top and travel to the national finals.

Read the press release here.

As a sponsor, PADT was honored to be in attendance at Denver’s Cable Center for the 5th Anniversary event.  The best part was that two of the three finalists were companies from Tucson Arizona.  The three winners were:

  • Grannus (Tucson, AZ) as a finalist and sustainability award winner for their zero-emissions process for making nitrogen fertilizer.
  • HJ3 Composite Technologies (Tucson, AZ) as a finalist for their composite infrastructure repair system.
  • OptiEnz Sensors (Ft. Colins, CO) as a Finalist for their in-situ organic chemical sensors.

We enjoyed working with all of the applicants throughout the year and look forward to working with the finalists as they move forward.  We wish them the best of luck and are rooting for them to return to the region as one of the winners.

 

Video Tips: DesignXplorer – Single Objective Parameterization

This video gives an example of using DesignXplorer to automate the optimization of a tuning fork to achieve a particular desired frequency

ANSYS 14.5.7 Quick Install Instructions for Windows

ANSYS-14-5-7_Install-GuideAs part of our support for our existing ANSYS customers we prepare a quick install guide that we can send users when they get the new releases. The contents are based upon our own install experience, and what we have learned helping our customers install on a large number of different networks.  We just updated the 14.5.7 guide for Windows and thought we would share it with the community.

This particular release is fairly straight forward, so this is a short doc.

We hope you find it useful:

ANSYS 14 5 7_Install_Quick_Guide

Customers and Partners Win at AZBio Awards and Pittsburgh Tech 50 for 2013

It is awards season and PADT partners and customers are racking up the wins around the country.

AZBio-Awards-2013-Header-10-10

On October 10th we were fortunate enough to be at the 2013 AZBio Awards where we were pleased to see:

  • The founder of customer Ventana Medical Systems,  Thomas M. Grogan, M.D, win a Lifetime Achievement Award.
  • Customer W. L. Gore and Associates picked up the Arizona Bioscience Company of the Year Award.
  • Linda Hunt, the President and CEO of Dignity Health Arizona received the Arizona Bioscience Leader of the Year award. The Barrow Neurological Institute, part of Dignity Health, is a PADT customer.

Not only were we pleased to see these winners, but once again PADT provided the trophies for these awards so they were able to take a little piece of PADT home with them.

AZ-Bio-Awards-2013

 

More images from the event can be found on their Facebook page.

Pittsburgh-tech-50-ANSYS-Alung-2013Then just today we received word that the Pittsburgh Technology Council announced the winners of their Tech 50 for 2013.  And once again, a PADT customer and one of our most important partner received an award.

  • Medical device customer ALung won the Life Sciences Company of the Year award.
  • ANSYS, Inc., a partner and customer, was awarded the Tech Titan Award for, well being a tech titan.

We offer our congratulations to all of the winners and hope to see more as the awards season continues.

If you want to win a few technology awards, maybe you should consider being a PADT customer… seems like a trend.

Final PADT Open House Held at Littleton Colorado Office

SONY DSCThis past Wednesday customers, vendors, and friends of PADT gathered at our new Littleton, Colorado office for the third and final open house for 2013.  It was definitely a little cold outside, but that did not keep people away from some good discussions, beverages, and a chance to meet other people in the area who are interested in the sort of things that PADT does: simulation, product development, and rapid prototyping.

We were fortunate to have Debbie Brinkman, the mayor of Littleton, and several council members in attendance along with representatives from the South Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce and the Colorado Space Business Roundtable.

Besides the chance to socialize, the highlights of the evening were the ribbon cutting ceremony and the tour of PADT’s new office.  As always the 3D Printers were a big hit.

Here are some pictures of the event:

SONY DSC  When the sun was still out, it was a good time to share a beer and talk about engineering and technology in Colorado.

SONY DSC

The old county courthouse served as a great backdrop for the event.

SONY DSC

Since this is a new office for s, the city held a ribbon cutting ceremony.  From left to right were:  John Brackney (South Metro Denver Chamber), Ward Rand (PADT Co-Owner), Eric Miller (PADT Co-Owner), Mayor Debbie Brinkman (Littleton), Edgar Johansson (Colorado Space Business Roundtable), and Norman Stucker (PADT Colorado GM)SONY DSC

Clinton Smith, Patrick Barnett, and Stephen Theron from PADT were there to meet with customers and catch up.

SONY DSCMario Vargas, PADT’s Hardware Sales manager, spent much of the evening showing off PADT’s collection of 3D printers that are in the Littleton office.

When Colorado’s attendance of 125 is added to around 50 people at the Albuquerque, New Mexico open house, 300 in Tempe, Arizona we estimate that over 475 people came to one of our events this year.  We hope to see even more for our 20th anniversary celebrations in 2014.

 

PADT on Panel for Immigration Reform Discussion at University of Colorado Boulder

The Global Innovation Forum and several other groups (see picture) put together a very informative discussion on immigration reform and its impact on high-technology companies and university research.  PADT’s Eric Miller was asked to server on the panel and share our experience with the immigration process and how the current system impacts our business.

photo

 

We learned several key things during the discussion:

  1. The need for immigration reform is a high priority item across high technology industry companies.
  2. The issues that companies have with the current immigration system seem to be consistent: not enough H1B visas, a lottery system that is often overwhelmed by a few large companies, once a year lottery, and the non-portability of a visa if the immigrant changes jobs.
  3. The Senate comprehensive reform bill actually addresses many of the concerns raised, but it is stalled in the US House of Representatives.  It may pass in pieces.
  4. There is strong consensus on most details of immigration reform, the sticking point seems to be what to do about those who are currently in the country without a visa or a clear path to one.
  5. We learned a lot about the significant problems that students and professors face when they are studying/working in the US on an educational visa. It especially impacts their family.

This group seems to be trying to advocate a common sense approach to fixing our immigration system.  A very interesting meeting and it was an honor to participate.

We encourage all of you to engage in such a discussion and change the dialog to think of immigration comprehensively and update our system so that the US can continue its leadership in the areas of innovation and research.

And in the end: we know that process of immigration is hard and stressful, so it is better to check your address registration with https://www.us-mailing-change-of-address.com/blog/change-of-address-texas/, so you can get your documents at the right place and time.

/HBC: One of Those Little Known Commands

The other day we received a tech support call requesting a way to remove the space between the element faces on a pressure plot.  He wanted this so that he could get a contour plot without seeing the contours of the elements on the back side of the part. So I built my trusty test block and applied a pressure. By turning on the pressure load symbols with  the /PSF command, also under PlotCrtls > Symbols, you can get plots like this.

image

Face Outlines (/PSF,1,1)

 

image

Arrows (/PSF,1,2)

 

image

Contours (/PSF,1,3)

Of course the customer was using this last contour plot option, but as you can see below, if you have pressure on both sides of the model, then the backside pressures show through the gaps. The plot can get a bit confusing. So after some digging, starting with the /PSF command, and not finding any reference on how to change the plot behavior, I asked around if anyone else had a way to do it, other than my first inclination which was to write a macro. So as I reverted to creating a macro, to do what should be a simple task, I thought, “No, there HAS to be an easier way.” Of course there is.

image

The one thing I’ve learned over the years… Well, yes, I’ve learned more than ONE thing, but I’m trying to make a point here… The one thing I’ve learned over the years, is that no matter how much I learn, there is always someone who know more than me.  So I asked Sheldon! (Not the Sheldon on Big Bang Theory; ANSYS, Inc’s very own Sheldon Imaoka.) I thought, “Surely he will know some undocumented command to save me time.  It took him all of three minutes to get back to me with the /HBC command. It is a fully documented, but seldom used, command that is hidden in the recesses of the Command Reference that determines how boundary condition symbols are displayed. When turned on, it will “use an improved pressure contour display.” So you go from the picture on the top, to the picture on the bottom.

imageimage

So I learned two new things. One is the /HBC command can give you nicer looking plots. The other, and even more useful thing, is to click the links on the help page at the upper right corner.

image

For if I did, I would have found the /HBC command on my own.

image

It looks like I need to sit down with a nice cup of hot chocolate* and the Command Reference and just scan the listing for commands that I don’t recognize and learn what they do.  Oh, what I go through for you people. Well, I’ll just make sure that it’s really good hot chocolate*.   I’ll write a new post from time to time on cool commands I find useful.

Have a great day!!!

*It’s 85 degrees here this week and I really meant iced tea, but I didn’t want to rub it in. Smile

Part 2: ANSYS FLUENT Performance Comparison: AMD Opteron vs. Intel XEON

AMD Opteron 6308, INTEL XEON e5-2690 & INTEL XEON e5-2667V2 Comparison using ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7

Note: The information and data contained in this article was complied and generated on September 12, 2013 by PADT, Inc. on CUBE HVPC hardware using FLUEN 14.5.7.  Please remember that hardware and software change with new releases and you should always try to run your own benchmarks, on your own typical problems, to understand how performance will impact you.

By David Mastel

Due to the response to the original article on this subject,  I thought it would be good to do a quick follow-up using one of our latest CUBE HVPC builds. Again, the ANSYS Fluent standard benchmarks were used in garnering the stats on this dual socket INTEL XEON e5-2667V2 configuration.

CUBE HVPC Test configurations (Same as in last comparison)

  • Server 1: CUBE HVPC c16
  • CPU: 4, AMD Opteron 6308 @ 3.5GHz (Quad Core)
  • Memory: 256GB (32x8G) DDR3-1600 ECC Reg. RAM (1600MHz)
  • Hardware RAID Controller: Supermicro AOC-S2208L-H8iR 6Gbps, PCI-e x 8 Gen3
  • Hard Drives: Supermicro HDD-A0600-HUS156060VLS60 – Hitachi 600G SAS2.0 15K RPM 3.5″
  •  OS: Linux 64-bit / Kernel 2.6.32-358.18.1.e16.x86_64
  • App: ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7
  • MPI: Platform MPI
  • HCA: SMC AOC-UIBQ-M2 – QDR Infiniband
    • The IB card installed however solves were run distributed locally
  • Switch: MELLANOX IS5023 Non-Blocking 18-port switch

Server 2: CUBE HVPC c16i (Intel server from last comparison)

  • CPU: 2, INTEL XEON e5-2690 @ 2.9GHz (Octa Core)
  • Memory: 128GB (16x8G) DDR3-1600 ECC Reg. RAM (1600MHz)
  • RAID Controller: Supermicro AOC-S2208L-H8iR 6Gbps, PCI-e x 8 Gen3
  • Hard Drives: Supermicro HDD-A0600-HUS156060VLS60 – Hitachi 600G SAS2.0 15K RPM 3.5″
  • OS: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
  • App: ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7
  • MPI: Platform MPI

Server 3: CUBE HVPC c16ivy (New “Ivy” based Intel server)

  • CPU: 2, INTEL XEON e5-2667V2 @ 3.3 (Octa Core)
  • Memory: 128GB (16x8G) DDR3-1600 ECC Reg. RAM (1600MHz)
  • RAID Controller: Supermicro AOC-S2208L-H8iR 6Gbps, PCI-e x 8 Gen3
  • Hard Drives: Supermicro HDD-A0600-HUS156060VLS60 – Hitachi 600G SAS2.0 15K RPM 3.5″
  • OS: Linux 64-bit / Kernel 2.6.32-358.18.1.e16.x86_64
  • App: ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7
  • MPI: Platform MPI
  • HCA: SMC – QDR Infiniband
    • The IB card installed however solves were run distributed locally

ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7 Performance using the ANSYS FLUENT Benchmark suite provided by ANSYS, Inc.

ANSYS Fluent Benchmark page link:http://www.ansys.com/Support/Platform+Support/Benchmarks+Overview/ANSYS+Fluent+Benchmarks

Release ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7 Test Cases
(20 Iterations each)

  • Reacting Flow with Eddy Dissipation Model (eddy_417k)
  • Single-stage Turbomachinery Flow (turbo_500k)
  • External Flow Over an Aircraft Wing (aircraft_2m)
  • External Flow Over a Passenger Sedan (sedan_4m)
  • External Flow Over a Truck Body with a Polyhedral Mesh (truck_poly_14m)
  • External Flow Over a Truck Body 14m (truck_14m)

Here are the results for all three machines, total and average time:

Intel-AMD-Flunet-Part2-Chart1Intel-AMD-Flunet-Part2-Chart2

 

Summary: Are you sure? Part 2

So I didn’t have to have the “Are you sure?” question with Eric this time and I didn’t bother triple checking the results because indeed, the Ivy Bridge-EP Socket 2011 is one fast CPU! That combined with a 0.022 micron manufacturing process  the data speaks for itself. For example, lets re-dig into the data for the External Flow Over a Truck Body with a Polyhedral Mesh (truck_poly_14m) benchmark and see what we find:

Intel-AMD-FLUENT-Details

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Intel-AMD-FLUENT-summary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Pricing of INTEL® and AMD® CPU’s

Here is the up to the minute pricing for each CPU’s. I took these prices off of NewEgg and IngramMicro’s website. The date of the monetary values was captured on October 4, 2013.

Note AMD’s price per CPU went up and the INTEL XEON e5-2690 went down. Again, these prices based on today’s pricing, October 4, 2013.

AMD Opteron 6308 Abu Dhabi 3.5GHz 4MB L2 Cache 16MB L3 Cache Socket G34 115W Quad-Core Server Processor OS6308WKT4GHKWOF

  •  $501 x 4 = $2004.00

Intel Xeon E5-2690 2.90 GHz Processor – Socket LGA-2011, L2 Cache 2MB, L3 Cache 20 MB, 8 GT/s QPI

  • $1986.48 x 2 = $3972.96

Intel Xeon E5-2667V2 3.3 GHz Processor – Socket LGA-2011, L2 Cache 2MB, L3 Cache 25 MB, 8 GT/s QPI,

  • $1933.88 x 2 = $3867.76

REFERENCES:
http://www.ingrammicro.com
http://www.newegg.com

INTEL XEON e5-2667V2
http://ark.intel.com/products/75273/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2667-v2-25M-Cache-3_30-GHz

INTEL XEON e5-2690
http://ark.intel.com/products/64596/

AMD Opteron 6308
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/Opteron_6300_QRG.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-precision_floating-point_format

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_processing_unit#Integer_range

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_point

STEP OUT OF THE BOX, STEP INTO A CUBE

PADT offers a line of high performance computing (HPC) systems specifically designed for CFD and FEA number crunching aimed at a balance between cost and performance. We call this concept High Value Performance Computing, or HVPC. These systems have allowed PADT and our customers to carry out larger simulations, with greater accuracy, in less time, at a lower cost than name-brand solutions. This leaves you more cash to buy more hardware or software.

Let CUBE HVPC by PADT, Inc. quote you a configuration today!

 

PADT at University of Denver Industry Day and Lecturing at Univerisity of New Mexico

IndustryDay-DU-PADT2It is a busy couple of days for PADT and Academia.  Jeff Strain is visiting with customers in Albuquerque and popped in to the “Finite Element Methods in Solid Mechanics” class at the University of New Mexico to give a talk on the ANSYS products and give some  on real world insight in to using finite elements in industry.

We were also happy to attend Industry Day at the University of Denver’ School of Engineering & Computer Science.  It was another great opportunity to interact with students,  give them some real world feedback, and meet with other technology companies in the area.

 

Quick Tip: Tool for Putting LaTex Equations in PowerPoint

I’m not a big fan of LaTex. That is probably more a reflection of the fact that I don’t have an advanced degree and didn’t have to write a dissertation than anything else.  But one thing that is worse than LaTex is the equation editor in PowerPoint. If you are like us, you use PowerPoint as your primary reporting tool and dread putting equations in.

Matt Sutton was doing just that the other day and thought “there has got to be a better way!”  He found one. A tool called IguanaTex.

http://www.technion.ac.il/~zvikabh/software/iguanatex/download.html

There is not much to it, it is free, and it works well.

Iguana Tex screen shot

Example of IguanaTex output

Here are some equations from a presentation Matt just did:

Equations

 

 

 

Making APDL Parameters Available in the ANSYS Parameter Manager or DesignXplorer: Prep, Solve, and Post

This is one of those questions that comes up every once in a while that is not so obvious at first glance, but that is simple once you understand how ANSYS Mechanical interacts with ANSYS Mechanical APDL.  After a couple of email exchanges around a tech support question, we thought it would be good to share with everyone.

Before we get started, if you need a refresher on Command Objects in ANSYS Mechanical, the way in which you send APDL commands to the ANSYS Mechanical APDL solver, here is a seminar from a couple of years ago that covers the whole deal:

The basic problem is this: you have an APDL script you execute as a command object that does some sort of model interrogation or stores the result of some calculation, and you want to use that parameter in the parameter manager or in DesignXplorer.  If you look at the details view for a command object you will notice that it only supports input parameters: ARG1-ARG9.

image

If you look at the example (silly) macro you will see that it:

  1. Grabs component (named selection) END1
  2. Figures out how many nodes are attached to END1 (NMND)
  3. Takes ARG1 as the total load applied load
  4. Calculates the per node load by dividing the total load by the number of loads.
  5. Applies that per node load
  6. Reselects all the nodes

If I want to know how many nodes I put the load on and what the per node load is I’m kind of stuck here.  Any command object you add to the tree above the Solution branch only allows input parameters.

But a command snippet applied in the Solution branch is different, it allows you to pull parameters back and share them through the parameter manager.

When you first insert a command object you only get input parameters (ARG1-ARG9) as usual, and an empty section called “Results”

image

The way you get result parameters, or what I think should be called “Output Parameters” is you create a parameter in the command object’s APDL script that starts with “my_”  When you click outside the text input window the program parses you script and if it finds any “my_” parameters in the text, it sticks them in the Results section:

image

Note, the default is “my_” but you can change it n the “Output Search Prefix” line in the Definition block.

Initially they will show up pinkish because the model has not been run and they are not defined. Click on the box to make them parameters that get passed outside of the program and then run:

image

If you pop back out to the project view you will see that we now have a Parameter Set bar with both input and output parameters:

image

And if you open the parameter manager up you can see the input and output parameters:

image

This works because all ANSYS mechanical is doing is making one big batch input file for ANSYS MAPDL.  That file contains any command objects you insert into the tree and extracts any parameters that you tagged in a post processing command object for return to ANSYS Mechanical.

Congratulations to Orbital Sciences on Successful Docking

imageAnother great customer success to report:

Orbital Sciences Corporation, a PADT customer and former employer of several staff members, was the second company to commercially doc with the International Space Station.  Those other guys in California owned by the Internet Billionaire always get the bigger press, so we wanted to do a shout out to the OSC team and let them know we are proud of them and all they accomplish, often out of the media spotlight.

Read all about it in this Wall Street Journal Article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303918804579104920967608730.html

We started working with the Arizona group back when they were Space Data Corporation and we have seen success followed by success as they prove out to be the less flashy leader in commercial space. Most people don’t know that OSC made had their 500th mission back in 2006. We are proud to support them as one of their suppliers and wish them further luck in this and other programs.

 

 

Four PADT Customers Named Finalists for MD+DI’s 2013 Medical Device Manufacturer of the Year

Orthosensor Medical DeviceLast week we found out that PADT’s long time co-located customer, Orthosensor, was named as a finalists in MD+DI’s 2013 Medical Device Manufacturer of the Year competition.  PADT has been working very closely with Orthosensor for many years with them actually putting a team inside PADT’s offices. We know they deserve recognition for the advances they have made. Congratulations!  This recognition not only underscores the technical and clinical successes of Orthosensor, it also highlights that commercial success they have had in partnering with industry leading orthopedic firms.

You can learn more about what PADT has done with Orthosensor by reading this case study.

The competition is pretty significant in the medical device industry and finalists and winners are chosen by the editing staff:

Each year, MD+DI recognizes one or more medical device companies that have risen above the crowd to advance medical device manufacturing. In looking at the field this year, we realized that the firms influencing the medical device business the most come from both within and outside the industry.

Some of our 10 finalists for the 2013 Medical Device Manufacturer of the Year are traditional device companies making waves with novel products and innovative business strategies; others are outsiders that are pushing boundaries by changing the definition of medical device manufacturing. We believe all of them are helping to evolve the industry.

– http://www.mddionline.com/article/2013-medical-device-manufacturer-year-finalists

There is a reader’s poll.  (Hint) We encourage everyone to take a look at the finalistsand voice their opinion (hint, hint) on who should get the award. And if they vote for Orthosensor, they will know they voted for a quality firm that has a close and long relationship with PADT. (Hint, hint, hint)

But wait, there is more! While getting the link for the Orthosensor mention, we were even more pleased to see first one, then two, then three other PADT customers listed. 40% of this years finalists are PADT customers.  That is something we are very proud of because it shows that we are working with customers that are really making a difference in peoples health:

  • Medtronic has been a long time prototyping and simulation services customer of PADT and we know that their wide array of life saving products really make a difference.
  • When Roche Diagnostics purchased long time customer Ventana Medical Systems we knew it would lead to great things. Now their tissue diagnostic systems are evolving faster and a wider range of customers have access to this very important tool in the daily struggle to battle cancer.  They also have one of the most beautiful campus locations of any of our customers. And since all the work we do for them is confidential, a picture of the campus will have to do.
  • Stratasys-PADTStratasys.  Yes that Stratasys. The company that PADT not only sells for but that is also a customer. You didn’t know they were also a customer? Stratasys purchases and bundles PADT’s SCA cleaning system for their Fused Deposition Modeling systems.To see Stratasys listed in this competition is a big deal for us, having used their technology for years to help our medical device customers.  We love the recognition that Rapid Prototyping (even if we have to call it 3D Printing) is getting these days for the real and substantial contribution it is making across industries.What is kind of cool in a rapid-prototyping-links-everything sort of way is that we have used Stratasys hardware to support all three of the device companies companies listed.

With four horses in this race we feel confident we will be congratulating one of them as this years winner!

ANSYS FLUENT Performance Comparison: AMD Opteron vs. Intel XEON

AMD Opteron 6308 & INTEL XEON e5-2690 Comparison using ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7

Note: The information and data contained in this article was complied and generated on September 12, 2013 by PADT, Inc. on CUBE HVPC hardware using FLUEN 14.5.7.  Please remember that hardware and software change with new releases and you should always try to run your own benchmarks, on your own typical problems, to understand how performance will impact you.

A potential customer of ours was interested in a CUBE HVPC mini-cluster. They requested that I run benchmarks and garner some data on a two CPU’s. The CPU’s were benchmarked on two of our CUBE HVPC systems. One mini-cluster has dual INTEL® XEON e5-2690 CPU’s and another mini-cluster has quad AMD® Opteron 8308 CPU’s. The benchmarking was only run on a single server using a total of 16 cores on each machine. The same DDR3-1600 ECC Reg RAM, Supermicro LSI 2208 RAID Controller and Hitachi SAS2 15k RPM hard drives were used on each system.

clip_image002clip_image004clip_image006clip_image008

CUBE HVPC Test configurations:

Server 1: CUBE HVPC c16
  • CPU: 4, AMD Opteron 6308 @ 3.5GHz (Quad Core)
  • Memory: 256GB (32x8G) DDR3-1600 ECC Reg. RAM (1600MHz)
  • Hardware RAID Controller: Supermicro AOC-S2208L-H8iR 6Gbps, PCI-e x 8 Gen3
  • Hard Drives: Supermicro HDD-A0600-HUS156060VLS60 – Hitachi 600G SAS2.0 15K RPM 3.5″
  • OS: Linux 64-bit / Kernel 2.6.32-358.18.1.e16.x86_64
  • App: ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7
  • MPI: Platform MPI
  • HCA: SMC AOC-UIBQ-M2 – QDR Infiniband
    • The IB card installed however solves were run distributed locally
  • Stack: RDMA 3.6-1.el6
  • Switch: MELLANOX IS5023 Non-Blocking 18-port switch
Server 2: CUBE HVPC c16i
  • CPU: 2, INTEL XEON e5-2690 @ 2.9GHz (Octa Core)
  • Memory: 128GB (16x8G) DDR3-1600 ECC Reg. RAM (1600MHz)
  • RAID Controller: Supermicro AOC-S2208L-H8iR 6Gbps, PCI-e x 8 Gen3
  • Hard Drives: Supermicro HDD-A0600-HUS156060VLS60 – Hitachi 600G SAS2.0 15K RPM 3.5″
  • OS: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
  • App: ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7
  • MPI: Platform MPI

ANSYS FLUENT 14.6.7 Performance using the ANSYS FLUENT Benchmark suite provided by ANSYS, Inc.

The models we used can be downloaded from the ANSYS Fluent Benchmark page link: http://www.ansys.com/Support/Platform+Support/Benchmarks+Overview/ANSYS+Fluent+Benchmarks

Release ANSYS FLUENT 14.5.7 Test Cases  (20 Iterations each):
  • Reacting Flow with Eddy Dissipation Model (eddy_417k)
  • Single-stage Turbomachinery Flow (turbo_500k)
  • External Flow Over an Aircraft Wing (aircraft_2m)
  • External Flow Over a Passenger Sedan (sedan_4m)
  • External Flow Over a Truck Body with a Polyhedral Mesh (truck_poly_14m)
  • External Flow Over a Truck Body 14m (truck_14m)
Chart 1: Total Wall Clock Time in seconds: (smaller bar is better)

clip_image011

Chart 2: Average wall-clock time per iteration in seconds: (smaller bar is better)

clip_image015

 

Summary:

Are you sure?

That was the question Eric proposed to me after he reviewed the data and read this blog article before posting. I told him “yes I am sure data is data, and I even triple checked.” I basically re-ran several of the benchmarks to see if the solve times came out the same on these two CUBE HVPC workstations. I went on to tell Eric , “For example, lets dig into the data for the External Flow Over a Truck Body with a Polyhedral Mesh (truck_poly_14m) benchmark and see what we find.”

Quad socket Supermicro motherboard

4 x 4c AMD Opteron 6308 @3.5GHz

Dual socket Supermicro motherboard

2 x 8c INTEL e5-2690 @2.9GHz

clip_image002[1] clip_image004[1]

The INTEL XEON e5-2690 INTEL CPU dual socket motherboard is impressive; it may have been on the Top500 list of some of the fastest computers in the world ten years ago. Anyways, so after each solve I captured the solve data and as you can see below. The AMD Opteron wall clock time was faster than the INTEL XEON wall clock time.

So why did the AMD Opteron 6308 CPU pull away from the INTEL for the ANSYS FLUENT solve times? Lets take a look at couple of reasons why this happened. I will let you make your own conclusions.

  • Clock Speed, but would a 10.4GHz difference in total CPU speed make a 100% speedup in ANSYS Fluent wall-clock times?
  • Theoretical total of:
  • AMD® OPTERON 6308 = 16 x 3.5GHz = 56.0 GH
  • INTEL® XEON e5-2690 = 16 x 2.9GHz – 46.4 GHz
  • The floating point argument? The tic and tock of the great CPU saga continues.
  • At this moment in eternity, it is a known fact that the AMD Opteron 6308 and many of its brothers, have one floating point unit per two integer cores. INTEL has one integer core per one floating point core. However what this means to ANSYS CFD users in my MIS/IT simpleton terms is the AMD CPU was simply able to handle and process more data in this example.
  • It’s possible that there were more integer calculations required than floating point? If that is the case then the AMD CPU would have had eight pipelines for integer calculations. The AMD Opteron is able to process four floating point pipelines. While the INTEL CPU can process eight floating point pipelines.

Let us look at the details of what is on the motherboards as well.  4 data paths vs 2 can make a difference:

Dual socket Supermicro motherboard

2 x 8c INTEL e5-2690 @2.9GHz

Quad socket Supermicro motherboard

4 x 4c AMD Opteron 6308 @3.5GHz

Processor Technology 32-Naometer 32-Naometer SOI (silicon-on-insulator) technology
HyperTransport™ Technology Links

Quick Path Interconnect Links

Two links at up to 8GT/s per link up to 16 GB/s direction peak bandwidth per port Four x16 links at up to 6.4GT/s per link
Memory Integrated DDR3 memory controller – Up to 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth per socket
Number of Channels and Types of Memory Four links at up to 51.2GB/s per link Four x16 links at up to 6.4GT/s per link
Number of Channels and Types of Memory Quad channel support Quad channel support
Packaging LGA2011-0 Socket G34 – 1944-pin organic Land Grid Array (LGA)
Current pricing of the CPU’s

Here is the up to the minute pricing for each CPU’s. I took these prices off of NewEgg and IngramMicro’s website. The date of the monetary values was captured on September 12, 2013.

  • AMD Opteron 6308 Abu Dhabi 3.5GHz 4MB L2 Cache 16MB L3 Cache Socket G34 115W Quad-Core Server Processor OS6308WKT4GHKWOF
    • $499.99 x 4 = $1999.96
  • Intel Xeon E5-2690 2.90 GHz Processor – Socket LGA-2011, L2 Cache 2MB, L3 Cache 20 MB, 8 GT/s QPI,
    • $2010.02 x 2 = $4020.40

STEP OUT OF THE BOX,
STEP INTO A CUBE

PADT offers a line of high performance computing (HPC) systems specifically designed for CFD and FEA number crunching aimed at a balance between cost and performance. We call this concept High Value Performance Computing, or HVPC. These systems have allowed PADT and our customers to carry out larger simulations, with greater accuracy, in less time, at a lower cost than name-brand solutions. This leaves you more cash to buy more hardware or software.

Let CUBE HVPC by PADT, Inc. quote you a configuration today!