SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who's the best commercial NGS service provider in your opinion? nextnextgen Service Providers 1 10-20-2020 07:39 AM
Computer hardware mplace General 2 07-19-2013 05:44 PM
Server hardware and OS jdjax Bioinformatics 12 01-14-2011 07:18 PM
Opinion on facilities in Canada? entropy General 2 01-21-2010 09:18 AM
workstation hardware Berlinq Bioinformatics 7 12-10-2009 02:18 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-30-2014, 01:41 AM   #1
colin_c
Junior Member
 
Location: Dublin

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Default Opinion on Hardware

Hi All,

I'm currently in the process of buying a workstation for RNA-seq expression analysis (mRNA, miRNA, lnRNA snoRNA).

I was wondering what people thought of the following hardware:

HP Z820 Workstation
2 Xeon E5-2687Wv2 3.40Ghz 25MB 1866 8C
256GB DDR-3-1866 (8 X 32GB) 2CPU LR RAM
4 x 2TB 7200 SATA
RAID 5

Thanks!
Colin
colin_c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 02:15 AM   #2
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

Looks good. The RAM is a bit overkill for what you're doing at the moment, but of course it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:21 AM   #3
colin_c
Junior Member
 
Location: Dublin

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
Looks good. The RAM is a bit overkill for what you're doing at the moment, but of course it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it
Thanks for the reply! Is there an arguments for decreasing the RAM to 128GB and increasing the number of cores to 24?

Colin
colin_c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:26 AM   #4
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

128 is still enough for things like STAR, which might benefit from the increased core availability (though I've never benchmarked that). If you're planning to use DEXSeq or anything like that, then the increased number of cores would be beneficial. I can't think of anything normally used in RNAseq that'll need more than 128GB memory, though if you're going to need to assemble the transcriptomes (i.e., you're not using one of the common model organisms) then perhaps that'll need it (it's not something I ever need to do, so I can't provide any advice there).
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:34 AM   #5
colin_c
Junior Member
 
Location: Dublin

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
128 is still enough for things like STAR, which might benefit from the increased core availability (though I've never benchmarked that). If you're planning to use DEXSeq or anything like that, then the increased number of cores would be beneficial. I can't think of anything normally used in RNAseq that'll need more than 128GB memory, though if you're going to need to assemble the transcriptomes (i.e., you're not using one of the common model organisms) then perhaps that'll need it (it's not something I ever need to do, so I can't provide any advice there).
The majority of my work involves a non model organism so transcriptome assembly is a possibility.

In terms of the number of cores, I guess the trade off is run time?

Thanks!
Colin
colin_c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:38 AM   #6
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

Yeah, more cores will generally decrease run time (to a point, at least).
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 04:38 AM   #7
colin_c
Junior Member
 
Location: Dublin

Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
Yeah, more cores will generally decrease run time (to a point, at least).
Thanks for you help! Much appreciated!
colin_c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 06:02 AM   #8
GenoMax
Senior Member
 
Location: East Coast USA

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,087
Default

SATA disks probably would become the bottleneck with a large number of cores. You should probably stick with your original configuration but you may want to include a good (intel) SSD for your OS.
GenoMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2014, 10:02 AM   #9
Brian Bushnell
Super Moderator
 
Location: Walnut Creek, CA

Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,707
Default

If you want to do assembly of eukaryotes, I do not recommend increasing core-count at the expense of memory. 256g will already be limiting in some scenarios, depending on the size of the organisms you're working with. Many assemblers do not scale well with large numbers of processors, anyway, though mappers should scale linearly.
Brian Bushnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO