*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
On Dell T3500 with BIOS A04 or A13, OCZ RevoDrive 3 X2 alike will boot. requires fresh windows install.
However, I would recommend LSI MegaRAID 9240-4i (-8i), Dell PERC H310 or better on DELL T3600/T3500 workstations (HP Z420/620/820) and 2-3 SSDs in RAID 0 - for data processing only. For OS and programs the newest WD 1TB Velociraptor would be OK. Streaming to RAM is a good possibility, if you have that capability and sufficient RAM.
I would prefer 2-3 SSDs in RAID 0 for transient data processing (I am not sure about OCZs, I have a couple of them, the old SATA II ones, OK so far). I would give preference to Plextor M5P (We have Plextor 512GB M3P) or Samsung 840 Pro (Pro as it is MLC, do not get TLCs 840 series).
Use a separate 256 or 512 GB SSD for data caching only (OCZs would be OK for data caching).
If you need more details, please let me know.
Vitaly
________________________________
From: Arvydas Matiukas <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: Computer for image analysis ... SSD PCI-e cards, great, die catastrophically, may have have trouble finding an optimized O.S. driver
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
I may corroborate regarding recording time series to SSD drive.
For optical electrophysiology application we needed 500 frames/sec
at 128x128, 16bit resolution and repeatedly for 10-200 sec duration,
Only recording to a SSD (or alternatively to RAM which would be
more expensive and still require later copying to a permanent storage)
could sustain the required data transfer rate.
Switching back to PCIe SSD cards: does anybody was able to install OS and boot
system from them . Booting should be ultra fast at 1000MB/sec data transfer,
Arvydas
>>> Craig Brideau 03/10/13 11:54 PM >>>
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
In our microscope computers we use SSD's only for immediate experiments.
The key advantage is that if you are taking volumes over a time series the
drive can save each volume very quickly, allowing your time points to be
closer together since you don't have to wait for a disk write to complete.
Since SSD's are still fairly expensive I only put enough space in the
machine for a few experiments; the users are required to move their data
over the network to a central storage server rather than leaving it on the
host computer. This lets us get away with smaller and cheaper SSD's (or
small but good quality SSDs for reasonable prices) while still having
secure storage after the fact. I agree with George that you shouldn't
leave anything on them long term. That said, some high-end servers use
banks of SSD's rather than hard disks when the data has to be accessed
frequently. They get around the potential reliability issue by using RAID
arrays of SSD's. This is pricey, but very efficient for critical
applications.
Craig
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 2:58 PM, George McNamara
wrote:
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/**wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> I second Craig's comment on SSD PCI-e card speed. I have several such
> cards in my core's PC's, also some of their SSD SATA drives. One problem
> with all SSD's is when they die, that's it" everything is lost. Back it up
> or expect to lose it. Don't count on achieving the specifications provided
> by OCZ (or any other vendor) - operating system driver performance may be
> limiting.
>
>
>
> On 3/10/2013 2:30 PM, Craig Brideau wrote:
>
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/**wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>> *****
>>
>> As Oliver says, an SSD can help speed things along. You can get PCI-e
>> cards which are SSD's rather than relying on the SATA bus for data
>> transfer. They can be quite speedy depending on what you are doing:
>>
>> http://www.ocztechnology.com/**products/solid_state_drives/**
>> pci-e_solid_state_drives
>>
>> I use one of these in our image acquisition computers tied to one of our
>> microscopes. It makes file writes for large image stacks go much faster
>> than a mechanical drive.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Oliver Biehlmaier<
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> *****
>>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/**wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>>> *****
>>>
>>> Yes, that is the correct order. At least for the software that we are
>>> using the CPU speed is the most important.
>>> The SSD for the OS and swapping (eg in Imaris) is also an important point
>>> for speed.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Oliver
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 05:56:27 -0500
>>>> From: "Watkins, Simon C"
>>>> Subject: Re: Subject: Computer for image analysis
>>>>
>>>> *****
>>>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/**wa?A0=3Dconfocalmicroscopy
>>>> *****
>>>>
>>>> So Oliver, what you are saying is that the ultimate bottleneck is the
>>>> CPU
>>>> speed, followed by RAM, followed by CPU core count and finally graphics
>>>> card capabilities?
>>>>
>>>> Simon Watkins Ph.D
>>>>
>>>> Professor and Vice Chair Cell Biology
>>>> Professor Immunology
>>>> Director Center for Biologic Imaging
>>>> University of Pittsburgh
>>>> Bsts 225 3550 terrace st
>>>> Pittsburgh PA 15261
>>>> Www.cbi.pitt.edu>
>>>> 412-352-2277
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/9/13 3:39 AM, "Oliver Biehlmaier"
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Arvydas,
>>>>> I equipped an entire image analysis room with new Image analysis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> machines
>>>
>>>
>>>> about 1.5 years ago. During the evaluation, our main focus was on the
>>>>> system's performance using software such as Imaris, Volocity, Huygens,
>>>>> Fiji, etc.
>>>>> As already posted in other replies to your email it turns out that GPU
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>
>>>
>>>> important, but bottlenecks are CPU, RAM, and the speed of the HDD.
>>>>> As our institute's IT asked us to go for a Dell-solution, we evaluated
>>>>> several possibilities from Dell. We ended up buying 2 Dell Precision
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> with
>>>
>>>
>>>> 3GB-GPU, XEON-processors and between 24 to 48GB of RAM, and many
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> "pimped"
>>>
>>>
>>>> Optiplex systems where we installed 3GB-GPU, the max. RAM (16GB), an SSD
>>>>> for the OS and swapping and a fast 500GB-HDD for saving the data.
>>>>> Price wise the Optiplex systems sum up to a third of the price of the
>>>>> precision.
>>>>> The main reason for the Optiplex was the i7 processor which is capable
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>
>>>
>>>> do overclocking which is not possible on the XEON systems. We expected
>>>>> this to be a key advantage in comparison to our expensive Precision
>>>>> systems.
>>>>> Now, after 1,5 years of usage I can confirm that this fully worked out.
>>>>> As many programs (especially Imaris) are still mainly relying on only
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> one
>>>
>>>
>>>> but definitely not on all cores, the overclocking feature of the i7
>>>>> system usually keeps them at the same level or even outperforms the
>>>>> Precision systems. Only the 48GB-RAM system is a bit faster on the rare
>>>>> occasions when it can fully profit from the large RAM (large time lapse
>>>>> or stitching tasks). But even then the fast swapping onto the SDDs on
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> Optiplex keeps them almost at the same level of performance.
>>>>> Only recently we ran into some minor problems with our ATI graphics
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> cards
>>>
>>>
>>>> which could have been prevented by using NVIDIA cards, thus I would
>>>>> recommend the latter. There is definitely no need to go for Quadra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> cards,
>>>
>>>
>>>> they are super expensive and receive less updates and patches than the
>>>>> gaming cards.
>>>>> I hope this helps you in your decision for your new systems.
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Oliver
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**----
>>>>> Oliver Biehlmaier, PhD
>>>>> Head of Imaging Core Facility
>>>>> Biozentrum, University of Basel
>>>>> Klingelbergstrasse 50/70
>>>>> 4056 Basel
>>>>> Switzerland
>>>>>
>>>>> Tel: +41 (61) 267 20 73
>>>>> Email: [log in to unmask]<**mailto:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.biozentrum.unibas.**ch/imcf
>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**----
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________
>>>>> From: Arvydas Matiukas>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> [log in to unmask]>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> To:=20
>>>>> [log in to unmask]**EDU
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>
>>>> [log in to unmask]**EDU >=
>>>
>>>
>>>> =3D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 20
>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 8, 2013 12:24 PM
>>>>> Subject: Computer for image analysis
>>>>>
>>>>> *****
>>>>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>>>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/**wa?A0=3D3Dconfocalmicroscopy
>>>>> *****
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear listers/microscopists,
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume there is good time to update new trends in
>>>>> image analysis hardware. The last discussions on image
>>>>> analysis computer were in 2006-8. Though the basic
>>>>> principles of CPU, RAM, hard drive, video card, monitor
>>>>> selection still hold some new types of hardware became
>>>>> popular/available, e.g. SSD drives, APU, water cooling.
>>>>> Now a decent gaming computer (~$1k) has the processing power
>>>>> of a 2006 expensive workstation (~$20K). I was suprised that
>>>>> I was able to completely overhaul my 8 year old ATX case
>>>>> to a quad core 2GHz APU, 8GB 1600MHz RAM, 160GB SATA-2
>>>>> SSD, water cooling, USB3 and SATA3 Gigabyte motherboard,
>>>>> and 4 monitor 1GB video card.
>>>>> for under $300 (online, after rebates).
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I am wiling to upgrade/overhaul my work computer which
>>>>> is used to run ImageJ, Fiji, Deconvolution (Autoquant, Huygens),
>>>>> Matlab, PV-Vawe, Labview, Origin. Please advice/share you thoughts
>>>>> what best configuration is possible to buy for $2-3k (monitor
>>>>> excluded).
>>>>> My first choice would be to go with a fast gaming computer, e.g.
>>>>> Dell-Alienware Aurora=3D20
>>>>> Windows* 7 Ultimate, 64Bit, English
>>>>> 2nd Generation Intel* Core* i7-3820 (10M Cache, Overclocked up to 4.1
>>>>> GHz)
>>>>> 16GB (4 X 4GB) Quad Channel DDR3 at 1600MHz
>>>>> NVIDIA* GeForce* GTX 660 1.5GB GDDR5
>>>>> 1TB RAID 0 (2x 500GB SATA 6Gb/s) Solid State Hybrid
>>>>> 19-in-1 Media Card Reader
>>>>> No Monitor
>>>>> Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
>>>>>
>>>>> The second choice would be to buy all components online and
>>>>> build a computer myself (I have done this about 50 times over
>>>>> 25 years). This option typically saves money or buys better
>>>>> components,
>>>>> and provides you full specs of the hardware. The con of this
>>>>> approach is that it wastes some of your time to debug/make all
>>>>> the hardware work together and with your software. However,
>>>>> as the computer is for me not just a box but a tool I am ready
>>>>> to make this sacrifice.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, is there any solid preference towards CPU Type (Intel ix/AMD/Intel
>>>>> Xeon)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your input/advice/thoughts,
>>>>> Arvydas
>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> End of CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Digest - 8 Mar 2013 to 9 Mar 2013 (#2013-58)
>>>> ****************************************************************
>>>> **********
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
