Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This study provides a rigorous analytical framework for optimizing MPI rank placement on AMD EPYC clusters, demonstrating that simple heuristic rules often outperform complex machine learning models like gradient boosted trees in predicting runtime and cost trade-offs. The findings are critical for high-performance computing practitioners managing memory-bound CFD workloads, offering actionable guidance on balancing superlinear speedups against energy consumption without relying on black-box predictors.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Data-Driven Prediction of Optimal MPI Rank Placement and Node Count for Memory-Bound CFD on AMD EPYC Clusters

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.23383v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Users who run a memory-bound OpenFOAM case on an AMD EPYC cluster must decide how many nodes to use and how many MPI ranks to place on each core complex. The fastest choice is often not the cheapest one. This paper revisits our earlier analytical model of this performance and energy trade-off with 560 measured configurations of the motorBike case on five Zen 4 and Zen 5 EPYC processors, including socket power from processor telemetry. On up to four nodes, small meshes are both fastest and cheapest on a single node on most processors. For the largest mesh the largest node count is both the fastest and the cheapest option, because its speedup is superlinear. A genuine trade-off arises only for medium meshes, where full speed costs a median of 20 to 97% more node hours than the cheapest option. The L3 miss rate and the halo traffic per cell are consistent with this pattern. For a new mesh of the same case, the configuration that was optimal on the nearest measured mesh is near optimal in 75 to 85% of the decisions. Running the two configurations it recommends for speed and for cost raises this share to 85 to 90% for runtime and node hours and determines the trade-off with median errors of 3 to 5 percentage points. Neither gradient boosted trees trained on the same data nor the earlier polynomial model improves on this simple procedure.

Abstract:Users who run a memory-bound OpenFOAM case on an AMD EPYC cluster must decide how many nodes to use and how many MPI ranks to place on each core complex. The fastest choice is often not the cheapest one. This paper revisits our earlier analytical model of this performance and energy trade-off with 560 measured configurations of the motorBike case on five Zen 4 and Zen 5 EPYC processors, including socket power from processor telemetry. On up to four nodes, small meshes are both fastest and cheapest on a single node on most processors. For the largest mesh the largest node count is both the fastest and the cheapest option, because its speedup is superlinear. A genuine trade-off arises only for medium meshes, where full speed costs a median of 20 to 97% more node hours than the cheapest option. The L3 miss rate and the halo traffic per cell are consistent with this pattern. For a new mesh of the same case, the configuration that was optimal on the nearest measured mesh is near optimal in 75 to 85% of the decisions. Running the two configurations it recommends for speed and for cost raises this share to 85 to 90% for runtime and node hours and determines the trade-off with median errors of 3 to 5 percentage points. Neither gradient boosted trees trained on the same data nor the earlier polynomial model improves on this simple procedure.

Performance (cs.PF); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.23383 [cs.PF]

(or arXiv:2610.23383v1 [cs.PF] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.23383 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 334 words

Related coverage