Does anyone do comparisons of graphics cards and measure performance in a VM? Specifically, do certain graphics cards boost performance when running VM’s on the desktop? I like to see my windows “snap” open when I switch from VM to VM. As a developer, I often wonder if spending an additional $150 on a popular graphics card will yield a perceptible performance boost.
Speaking of graphics cards, we recently bought a couple of used Nvidia Quadro graphics cards from a local CAD/CAM company that is upgrading their workstations. I got these at about 5% of their original retail price so I’m happy. We were having problems getting a couple of servers to go into sleep mode using Lights Out and we discovered that we needed a different graphics card to accomplish this. The plus side is that these are Nvidia cards with 240 CUDA cores and 4GB of RAM. So we now have the opportunity to try our hand at CUDA development if we want. I’m mostly interested in using CUDA for R.
One drawback to using CUDA, as I understand it, is that it is a single user interface. Say you have a CUDA GPU in a server, only one job at a time can access the CUDA cores. If you have 240 CUDA cores on your GPU and would like to appropriate 80 CUDA cores to an application — thinking you can run three of your apps at a time, well that is not possible. What it seems you have to do is have three graphics cards installed on the box and each user or job has access to a single card.
There’s a new Remote Desktop application coming out from MS that will run on your android device(s) as well as a new release from the Apple Store. I use the RDC from my mac mini and it works great. I’m not sure what they could throw in the app to make it more compelling however.
Toms Hardware has a fascinating article on SSD’s and performance in a RAID setup. On our workstations and servers, we have SSD’s acting as a cache for the work and perm folders on our drive arrays. According to the article, RAID0 performance tends to top out with three SSD’s for writes and around four on reads.
FancyCache from Romex Software has become PrimoCache. It has at least one new feature that I would like to test and that is L2 caching using an SSD. PrimoCache is in Beta so if you have the memory and hardware, it might be advantageous to give it a spin to see how it could improve your BI stack. We did a performance review of FancyCache on a series of posts on Analytic Workstations.
FYI, PrimoCache is not the only caching software available that can be used in a WPS environment. SuperSpeed has a product called SuperCache Express 5 for Desktop Systems. I’m unsure if SuperCache can utilize an SSD as a Level 2 cache. It is decently priced at $80 for a desktop version but $450 for a standard Windows Server version. I have to admit, $450 for a utility would give me cause for pause. For that kind of money, the results would have to be pretty spectacular. SuperSpeed offers a free evaluation as well.
If you are running a Linux box and want to enjoy the benefits of SSD caching, there’s a great blog article on how to do this for Ubuntu from Kyle Manna. I’m very intrigued by this and if I find some extra time, may give it the old Solid State Spin. There’s also this announcement about the Linux 3.10 Kernel and BCache that may make life a whole lot easier.
About the author: Phil Rack is President of MineQuest Business Analytics, LLC located in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Phil has been a SAS language developer for more than 25 years. MineQuest provides WPS and SAS consulting and contract programming services and is a authorized reseller of WPS in North America.