Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

minimaxir.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 108 posts

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#51

Post by icelancer »

mrb wrote: post #48
icelancer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTX 1080 GPU, i7-6700 Skylake, 64 GB DDR4 RAM, 2x500 GB 6 Gb/s SSDs for 99EUR/month with a one-time 99EUR setup fee. My lord. HPC resources are incredibly affordable. Hetnzer and some of the other dedicated server companies in Europe/Canada have some amazing deals (we've used OVH in the past with great success, and right now we use Paperspace for CPU intensive stuff we want to share expensive licensing on, like Visua…

" incredibly affordable " It could go a lot lower. Hetzner's profit margin on renting a server like this for 99€/month is formidable.

I'm sure they are, but there's turnover, customer service, attrition, obsolescence, etc that is all baked in, though clearly GTX 1080s will be valuable for some time, as will the i7 Skylake architecture.

Relative to the market, that price is very, very good.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#52

Post by [deleted] »

mrb wrote: post #48
icelancer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTX 1080 GPU, i7-6700 Skylake, 64 GB DDR4 RAM, 2x500 GB 6 Gb/s SSDs for 99EUR/month with a one-time 99EUR setup fee. My lord. HPC resources are incredibly affordable. Hetnzer and some of the other dedicated server companies in Europe/Canada have some amazing deals (we've used OVH in the past with great success, and right now we use Paperspace for CPU intensive stuff we want to share expensive licensing on, like Visua…

" incredibly affordable " It could go a lot lower. Hetzner's profit margin on renting a server like this for 99€/month is formidable.

[deleted]

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#53

Post by Thaxll »

paulsutter wrote: post #2

Shoutout for Hetzner's 99 euro/month server with a GTX 1080, much better than the pseudo-K80s that Google Cloud provides for $520/month. The Google K80s are half or quarter the speed of a real K80, part of the reason they show so badly in the comparison. https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex51-ssd-gpu?co...

That's not how you use cloud, you pay 99e/month no matter of the usage with bare metal.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#54

Post by [deleted] »

paulsutter wrote: post #2

Shoutout for Hetzner's 99 euro/month server with a GTX 1080, much better than the pseudo-K80s that Google Cloud provides for $520/month. The Google K80s are half or quarter the speed of a real K80, part of the reason they show so badly in the comparison. https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex51-ssd-gpu?co...

[deleted]

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#55

Post by Dylan16807 »

Thaxll wrote: post #53
paulsutter wrote: post #2

Shoutout for Hetzner's 99 euro/month server with a GTX 1080, much better than the pseudo-K80s that Google Cloud provides for $520/month. The Google K80s are half or quarter the speed of a real K80, part of the reason they show so badly in the comparison. https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex51-ssd-gpu?co...

That's not how you use cloud, you pay 99e/month no matter of the usage with bare metal.

Being easily burstable doesn't matter nearly as much when the price is 10x higher.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#56

Post by nickpsecurity »

shmageggy wrote: post #28
paulsutter wrote: post #2

Shoutout for Hetzner's 99 euro/month server with a GTX 1080, much better than the pseudo-K80s that Google Cloud provides for $520/month. The Google K80s are half or quarter the speed of a real K80, part of the reason they show so badly in the comparison. https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex51-ssd-gpu?co...

Wish HN had a 'save' feature so I can remember this comment when I need a GPU box.

You can hit the favorite link at the top of the thread so it's in your favorites.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#57

Post by Thaxll »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #55
Thaxll wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how you use cloud, you pay 99e/month no matter of the usage with bare metal.

Being easily burstable doesn't matter nearly as much when the price is 10x higher.

If you need heavy job on the spot bare metal company won't be able to deliver what you need. Only those cloud services have enough servers.

10x more seems a lot but it really depends on how you use it, it's no secret that cloud is more expensive.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#58

Post by visarga »

For research and experimentation what you need is your own DL box. It will pay for itself in a few months. You will feel better having your own reliable hardware that you don't share or have to pay by the minute, and that will impact the kind of ideas you are going to try.

Then you scale up to the cloud to do hyperparameter search.

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#59

Post by visarga »

shmageggy wrote: post #28
paulsutter wrote: post #2

Shoutout for Hetzner's 99 euro/month server with a GTX 1080, much better than the pseudo-K80s that Google Cloud provides for $520/month. The Google K80s are half or quarter the speed of a real K80, part of the reason they show so badly in the comparison. https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ex51-ssd-gpu?co...

Wish HN had a 'save' feature so I can remember this comment when I need a GPU box.

Your browser has a dedicated feature for that. It's called a bookmark. /s

Re: Benchmarking TensorFlow on Cloud CPUs: Cheaper Deep Learning Than Cloud GPUs

#60

Post by shaklee3 »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #36
0xbear wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyper threading is not harmful per se. It lets your CPU make forward progress when it would otherwise be stalled waiting for something. My issue is that they call hyperthreads "vCPU" which makes it seem like you're getting a full core, while in reality you're getting 60% of a core at most.

vCPU is a different concept than hyperthreading logical cores, though. They're decoupled. (vCPU comes from virtualization software like Xen.)

They are, but what you are buying is a HT cpu core on aws.
Post reply on HN