Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows Breaks Into Supercomputer Top 10

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the adversity-breeds-strength-in-redmond-too dept.

Supercomputing 294

yanx0016 writes "Wow, that's some news this week at SuperComputing 08. Apparently Microsoft Windows HPC Server 2008, with a Chinese hardware OEM (Dawning), made #10 on the Top500 list, edging out #11 by only 600 Gflops. Folks were shocked to see Microsoft getting so serious around HPC; I think we are only beginning to see a glimpse of Microsoft in the HPC field."

cancel ×

294 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Penis (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824507)

Very tasty.

Yeah, mut how much useful stuff is happening? (4, Insightful)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824529)

FLOPS and MIPS are all very well, but if the OS is pissing them away then it does not matter much.

Obligatory (5, Funny)

westbake (1275576) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825085)

Can you imagine a botnet of those?

I can.

Re:Obligatory (0, Redundant)

bug1 (96678) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825753)

+1 funny
+1 insightful

Obligatory (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825979)

This is a twitter sockpuppet, as mentioned here [slashdot.org] .

Re:Yeah, mut how much useful stuff is happening? (5, Funny)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825199)

FLOPS and MIPS are all very well, but if the OS is pissing them away then it does not matter much.

(Interviewing MS HPC Program Manager)

"Well, yeah it does stuff! Just look. You've got it all right here...Word, Excel, even Access. And just wait until you see how fast the cards fly when you win Solitaire!"

Re:Yeah, mut how much useful stuff is happening? (1)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825283)

This post prompts a longing for mod points...

Re:Yeah, mut how much useful stuff is happening? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25826099)

Funny, I used to use the solitaire win screen to do a quick and dirty benchmark of the computer. It wasn't fast on a 386. My new favorite one is the left click -> new on the desktop.

Re:Yeah, mut how much useful stuff is happening? (1, Insightful)

msromike (926441) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826429)

Where do you think the overhead is at? GUI, mouse, I/O? Do you think Internet Explorer is dragging it down?

My guess is that when it's running 600 GFLOPS that any "OS pissing" is marginal and doesn't matter one bit at all. Besides, doesn't the benchmark score get reported AFTER all of the OS overhead?

Where is the insight here? Just seems like the usual Microsoft bashing, though this time it doesn't even really make sense.

Retarded (5, Interesting)

Directrix1 (157787) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824541)

Honestly, why would anyone want to roll-out something like this on Windows. A lot of extra expense for little practical value.

Re:Retarded (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824637)

I seriously doubt that anyone with enough to spend on a top 10 supercomputer is worried about the Windows tax.

Re:Retarded (4, Insightful)

turgid (580780) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825031)

Flagship demo projects like this often get exceedingly big discounts from the vendors.

Re:Retarded (1, Insightful)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825629)

Not only that but I'm sure some assurances could be made on Microsoft's end that would enable a vendor to be more willing to undertake a large project with rather unproven software.

Re:Retarded (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825347)

Perhaps not, but even if true they should be worried about the unproven track record of Windows on HPC, the crap hardware support, the crap vendor support and the huge question marks over little things like performance and stability and you have to wonder why the hell you'd ever bother. Most software written for HPC systems never go near the OS specific features anyway: you do everything through libraries like MPI which abstract it all away for you. Where is the advantage of Windows on the compute nodes? Login/head nodes: MAYBE. Compute nodes? Pointless.

there are lots of Windows developers out there. (4, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824659)

That is, programmers who are familiar with Windows more than other systems.

And Microsoft is also looking to roll out a new language that is supposed to make parallel programming much easier for those programmers.

If it works, there would be a LOT more apps that take advantage of these systems.

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (1)

Valtor (34080) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824935)

I agree, we need something much easier for parallel programming...

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (2, Funny)

devjj (956776) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825207)

And you expect to find that in a Microsoft product?

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (4, Insightful)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825385)

It is possible, even if not entirely likely.

Developing a language and compiler that takes advantage of multiple CPUs (especially if it's scaling the number of CPUs) is something that a lot of research (or money). MS does have this. Whether they use it effectively is another matter.

Also, remember that they are not unfamiliar with HPC abstraction. Direct3D abstracts the architecture of the GPU, and GPUs have been parallel processors for a decade or so.

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (4, Informative)

BasharTeg (71923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825429)

Yes, actually. There are many concurrency projects for .NET. Take a look at declarative languages like F#, PLINQ (parallel LINQ), Parallel C#, Polyphonic C#

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F_Sharp_programming_language [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLINQ [wikipedia.org]

http://www.parallelcsharp.com/ [parallelcsharp.com]

http://research.microsoft.com/~nick/polyphony/ [microsoft.com]

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824967)

Typically, the codes running on these systems are programmed in standard Fortran, C, C++, do not use a GUI, and are largely independent of the OS.

They are number-crunching codes. Hence, "A lot of extra expense for little practical value".

Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (1, Insightful)

Erris (531066) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825029)

How can you combine "familiar" and "roll out new language" in the same breath? Even if someone is familiar with all the quirks and shortcomings of Windows programming, why would they risk significant money and time on M$'s next vaporware?

How can a new language or familiarity offset the massive difference in cost and hassle when it comes to building the thing and adding new nodes? I mean really, do you want to write you next grant around how many Windoze licenses you think you can afford rather than what you think you need to get the job done?

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (2, Insightful)

devjj (956776) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825255)

I stopped reading your post when I got to "M$". I don't like the company and avoid their products as much as possible, but if you're going to wear your bias on your sleeve you probably don't have anything valuable to add to the discussion.

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (0, Troll)

right handed (1310633) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825291)

M$ is for people who don't waste time typing "icrosoft."

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (1)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825533)

Of course what you factor in the disruption to my typing flow to go press Shift+4, are you really saving that much time?

omg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825795)

... are you serious?

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (2, Informative)

dedazo (737510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825563)

"Erris" and "right handed" (who replied to you) are just two of twitter's 14 sockpuppet accounts. [slashdot.org]

See this [slashdot.org] thread for a recent fun shill session.

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825619)

Oh, and another one here [slashdot.org] .

Expect a few more to show up, it's this guy's usual disruption MO. He gets modded to hell for his useless drivel and shilling, and then he starts whining about how Microsoft is subverting Slashdot just to get him.

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (1)

devjj (956776) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825701)

So I got downmodded because I didn't know who he is and called him out?

Lame.

Re:Does not compute. M$ is not for HPC. (2, Interesting)

dedazo (737510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825775)

Well, the mods go either way, mostly. We're into deep offtopic territory here now. It really depends on whether or not people with mod points think that a) his drivel is valuable; and b) whether or not his shilling is "OK" because of (a).

Read this [slashdot.org] if you have time. It's linked from the journal that documents his gaming of the moderation system, but it captures the whole thing very well. That's who you're dealing with here, so I generally recommend just stepping away or risk getting some twitter on your shoes, which is generally not hygienic :)

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825313)

Erm this is a super computer we are talking about, not a gaming PC or even a few servers.

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (2, Insightful)

LandDolphin (1202876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825535)

Not a gaming PC... yet.

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (1)

internerdj (1319281) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825683)

Crysis 2, here I come...

Re:there are lots of Windows developers out there. (2, Insightful)

remmelt (837671) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825627)

So you're getting your car fixed by the milkman?

Supercomputing and parallel computing are different than building regular apps and websites. Why would you want to get the wrong programmers for the job?

Re:Retarded (3, Funny)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824895)

Actually, Microsoft has an interesting idea here, to integrate a high performance computer installation with Windows client software such as Excel. Of course, there's no reason at all the back end supercomputer has to be running Windows, other than the fact that Microsoft will sell you the complete software stack, presumably through system integrators.

Frankly, I don't see why you'd want to do that, but obviously this is out of the box thinking. Maybe they see some application area for this, such as financial services, that is untapped, although if that's the case their timing is not fortuitous...

Re:Retarded (1)

jon3k (691256) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825081)

Ballmer already said numerous times that they're trying to catch up with google, they want to offer applications deployed over the web ala SaaS, so obviously they need a powerful cluster/grid backend to handle all the processing. This software, I'm assuming, will do exactly that.

Re:Retarded (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825127)

Integrating HPC with office apps? Wow, Excel really doesn't hold that much data to need a HPC to process it. Maybe if you're processing millions of Excel files filled to capacity that might be a different story...

Re:Retarded (1)

devjj (956776) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825341)

...Microsoft will sell you the complete software stack, presumably through system integrators.

Translation: Microsoft will lock you into their platform with while external integrators give you the illusion of choice.

Re:Retarded (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824919)

Honestly, why would anyone want to roll-out something like this on Windows.
.

Development tools. Something Microsoft is very, very, good at.
And missing from the summary is this little note: Just a year ago, the best Microsoft could do was 116th place based on rankings from Top500.org, which has been benchmarking supercomputers since 1993 with its bi-annual tests it calls "runs."

Re:Retarded (1)

devjj (956776) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825723)

That's probably easier than it sounds when you're the world's largest and most powerful software house and can afford to lose a lot of money to get to that spot.

What is the business case for this for Microsoft? Anyone know?

This seems like an area where an executive decided it was simply unacceptable for Windows not to play in this space.

Re:Retarded (1)

thermian (1267986) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825195)

why retarded? The only reason I wouldn't want to use windows for this kind of thing is their license fees. Since they have their per core license model, it would get really costly.

This makes me use Linux for such things.

Re:Retarded (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825815)

MS doesn't operate a per core licensing model, only a per physical CPU model. One CPU license is enough to cover 1, 2, 4, 8 or even more cores on CPU package.

Re:Retarded (4, Funny)

trb (8509) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825319)

Honestly, why would anyone want to roll-out something like this on Windows.

Did you ever see the hippos [youtube.com] doing the Dance of the Hours in Disney's Fantasia? It's like that.

Re:Retarded (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826223)

Honestly, why would anyone want to roll-out something like this on Windows. A lot of extra expense for little practical value.

Vista Benchmarking?

"World record! "True Cluster" supercomputer runs Vista at 87% its intended speed!"

All I read was "Windows Breaks"... (4, Funny)

syousef (465911) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824565)

...and I thought "hey, that's not news. I've known that for years!"

Re:All I read was "Windows Breaks"... (1)

MikeV (7307) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825621)

It's still not news even with the rest of the title. After all, given that it takes a @#*@&$ super-computer just to run Windows, they should know what they're doing.

I hope they've finally found the hardware that'll now allow them to actually appear to be fast so there's no reading War and Peace while waiting for Outlook to open.

There's nothing quite like Windows when it comes to making fast hardware work slow. Kinda like putting an anchor on a Ferrari. I imagine that the hardware now running their Top 10 machine would probably be a Top 1 machine if it were not running Windows...

That glimpse (1)

aztektum (170569) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824597)

Being the flash of the BSOD before your pricey super computer reboots?

Helping power the Great Firewall of China! (5, Funny)

crt (44106) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824603)

From the Dawning site:

Arming the "Golden Shield" project with comprehensive IT technology
With the rapid development of the Internet, the public security information construction has become an important component of national information construction. Dawning made contributions in improving information technology level within all of the public security departments, arming the "Golden Shield" project with information technology, equipping the "police" force with digitalization, intensifying the police by technology and comprehensively raising China public security's law enforcement and administrative capacity.

I like how they quote "police" force.

Re:Helping power the Great Firewall of China! (2, Funny)

ddusza (775603) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825931)

Rooooooooxxxxxxxxaaaannnn!!!! Oops, maybe Sting isn't the project lead on this one....

Bring it on (-1, Flamebait)

BasharTeg (71923) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824617)

Bring on the Windows haterade!

Cost per MIP or how many CALs (4, Interesting)

RichMan (8097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824619)

So how many CALs are required to access the system?

And if I want to make the system available to a different researcher every 2 hours how much is it going to cost them to be license compliant?

How much cpu power am I going to need to compute the licensing costs?

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sam/lic_cal.mspx

Re:Cost per MIP or how many CALs (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824701)

This is china. Don't you know that this copy of Windows was Pirated!

From the article, pricing is (5, Informative)

joeflies (529536) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824799)

"With the release of HPC Server 2008 a few weeks ago, Microsoft also offered an academic version priced at $15 per node to generate interest. By comparison, a commercial license runs $450 per node"

Re:From the article, pricing is (2, Interesting)

RichMan (8097) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825567)

The price per node is $450 commercial.

The #10 place was achieved with 30720 cores.

That is $13,840,000 for the HPC Server licenses. I presume each comes with the stanadard 50 or 100 CAL's.

Beyond that you are licensing 30720 cal's per each new user that gets access to the system.

Re:From the article, pricing is (4, Insightful)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826467)

Each node probably has 4 CPUs and 4 cores each, which reduces the price significantly, to only $28 for the commercial version, or about a dollar per node for the academic version.

That's not bad. And of course you don't understand the CALs, but hey, making erroneous statements can get you modded insightful so maybe I should spout something disingenuous about Linux, like it costs $699 to license it from SCO or something.

(For the uninformed, not all CALs are created equally and the parent is assuming that these are named licenses that must be purchased for each user. Many different kinds of CALs exist, and I suspect these are either physical unit licenses or concurrent access licenses, i.e.: you purchase 1 per node, period.)

Re:From the article, pricing is (1)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825781)

In further news, Linux is still free on a per-node basis. A 100 node machine is $45,000 cheaper with Linux, which means you could get a lot more nodes with the cost savings.

i must (1)

moniker127 (1290002) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824625)

Can You Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of These?

Re:i must (2, Funny)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824789)

Can you imagine a chair being thrown through the system administrator's window?

Re:i must (1)

longacre (1090157) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825235)

Thrown at a velocity of 180.6 teraflops, no less.

Re:i must (4, Funny)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825181)

But does it run Linux?

Re:i must (1)

ddusza (775603) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825995)

Only if you use Crossover or WINE

is its firewall enabled? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824643)

may $deity help us if it gets infected...

McColo (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824717)

Shortly after coming online, they noticed that it broke a speed record downloading "instructions" from abilena.podolsk-mo.ru

You get so excited about your new supercomputer... (4, Funny)

monktus (742861) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824749)

Then all you get is, "It looks like you're decoding the human genome. Would you like some help?"

Off topic, but I have to mention it (5, Insightful)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824755)

edging out #11 by only 600 Gflops

Emphasis mine.

Maybe I'm suffering from a case of advancing years, but I couldn't help but be amazed by this metric. These days it is indeed small, but another part of me remembers being a fifteen year old kid amazed at how absolutely great his C64 was.

I wonder exactly how many years a C64 would have to run to make up a single seconds worth of that difference. How long would a C64 have to run to perform 600 Gflop? How long would every single C64 ever made have to run? I wonder.

You'd have to run some integer-only 6502 IEEE floating point library or something like that to figure out how long a single floating point operation would take on the C64. Then multiply by 600G.

Would it be a few years? A few millenia? Blue-green algae?

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (5, Informative)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824911)

Ok, just because I'm strange I had to go and figure it out.

A C64, according to this guy [canberra.edu.au] runs at about 320 flops.

So, it would take that C64 600*10^9 / 320 = 1,875,000,000 seconds. That's 59.46 years.

Wiki says there were 30 million C64 units ever made. [wikipedia.org]

So that would be 1,875,000,000 seconds / 30,000,000 = 62.5 seconds.

It would take every single C64 ever made about a minute to make up the difference.

Wow.

Crap I'm old. =)

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (4, Insightful)

drharris (1100127) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824975)

I wish I had mod points! We need more nerds like you around here. +1 Informative!!

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (1)

BronsCon (927697) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825653)

Fuck me for having already commented, I wanted to mod GP up, too, after reading it...

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (4, Interesting)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825663)

A C64, according to this guy runs at about 320 flops.

That just can't be. I remember the Programmer's Reference Manual showing most normal instructions finishing in 2 or 3 clocks, or maybe 350,000 IPS. I can't imagine that FLOPS would be 1,000 times slower than other opcodes. I mean, I'm pretty certain I could re-implement them in assembler in many fewer than 1,000 instructions.

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (1)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826491)

And it'd implement the entire IEEE standard with every peculiarity and requirement?

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (1)

gwking (869658) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826077)

Bravo, sir, bravo!

Re:Off topic, but I have to mention it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824999)

The Commodore was roughly capable of one 8-bit MIPS, and with some software could probably do 500-1000 half-precision FLOPS (no floating point hardware-> all software implementation).

Feel free to work out the amount of work from there. (Remember most modern machines work with double precision FLOPs and have at least two 32-bit ALUs/CPU).

No doubt HPC will be a requirement... (4, Funny)

ivanmarsh (634711) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824771)

to run Windows 7.

more better performanse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824795)

This is good, exciting, and promising. With Vista being such a resource hog (and consecuently I dumped Vista and installed XP back on) it would be good to see MS concentrate on performance, not the sort of performance gains that come from running on the baddest hardware out there but the kind of gains that make each revision of software run better and more efficiently on teh same hardware. So when hardware gets faster your computing experience gets faster. Not faster hardware but same or slower response. This can be more efficiensy due to using less instructions to finish the same task or better algorithms to schedule tasks for more efficient carry outing.

the power of 100,000 BSODs at once (3, Funny)

swschrad (312009) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824821)

and 500 screens showing "allow or deny?"

Hopefully, HP will like this (5, Funny)

doublegauss (223543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824825)

For once, a computer that deserves the "Vista capable" sticker.

Re:Hopefully, HP will like this (1)

freeasinrealale (928218) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824963)

...and hopefully Hewlett-Packard will be happy selling it after getting burnt by Wintel 'Vista Capable' scam...

Chinese FLOPS? (1, Troll)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824851)

Who verifies the results of these tests? Are these Chinese results produced by doping, the way that Chinese "OEMs" produce high protein food by doping it with toxic melamine that kills children and pets, or shiny toys with lead paint that poisons children? Or any of the many other cheats Chinese "OEMs" use to get past tests with flying colors that bamboozle people into thinking it's really quality?

Re:Chinese FLOPS? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825481)

Researching the Shanghai Supercomputer Center, they were #10 in 2004 but have had same system for about 3 years now. [top500.org] Looks like they finally got a new system and were able to get #10.

Re:Chinese FLOPS? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825529)

hmm..I must inform you sir, that I find it offensive that YOU imply they cheat....I am incensed to inform you, that they DO NOT cheat...EVER...they just lie until they get caught, and then they kill a sacrificial plant manager to show they are concerned about their exports... geez...get it right...

From the Chinese Law firm:
Wiifukmgewd

Good Riddance To Chrysler, Ford, and GM: +1 True (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25824923)

Watch this clip and enjoy the LAST question at the end.

Your [talkingpointsmemo.com]
Federal Tax Dollars At Work

  These fucking pirates have been robbing the system for the last 40 years and now they are at the Cashierâ(TM)s window grovelling

For bucks . I enjoyed Ron Paulâ(TM)s monologue about returning to a gold standard. Ron Paul needs to cut some brush with BushCo

back in TexASS. The Libertarian philosophy is flawed: LESS government intervention? Right Ron. Pass the peace pipe !!!!

Nardelli from Chrysler ( privately held) is asking for money. Fuck you Nardelli.

Fuck Chrysler. Fuck GM. Fuck Ford.

Fuck you you fucking fuck-up automotive companies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sincerely,

Kilgore Trout

Say, this chocolate frosting tastes like.... (-1, Offtopic)

Marko DeBeeste (761376) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824941)

WAIT!! It is!!

They need the supercomputing.. (1, Funny)

powerslave12r (1389937) | more than 5 years ago | (#25824965)

That's just their testing machine for Windows 7. Hardware up people.

Re:They need the supercomputing.. (1)

Glonoinha (587375) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825625)

Think further down the road. Five years from now you and I will be using machines this powerful to prop open doors. Five years after that we won't even be able to give them away on Craigslist.

"windows breaks" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825077)

When I read the first two words of the headline I got ahead of myself and thought, "ain't that the truth!"

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825091)

Finally, a computer that comes close to being able to run Crysis at Max Settings.

It's all about the benjamins, baby (2)

jon3k (691256) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825113)

Software and hardware cost (seperated) per GFLOP please.

Potentially bogus (5, Interesting)

Greg Lindahl (37568) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825237)

A couple of years ago I was surprised when one of my HPC customers issued a press release saying that their machine ran Windows HPC. The high-speed interconnect we'd sold them had no Windows drivers. You can guess what was going on: MicroSoft paid for the press release, and the machine actually ran Linux.

Dawning's previous fast machine ran Linux.

Re:Potentially bogus (4, Interesting)

leoxx (992) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825443)

What is most interesting to me is that in the case of HPC, the situation between Windows and Linux is reversed. Linux has overwhelming market share in HPC, compared to Windows status as a niche player (and that is being generous). Despite this fact, Microsoft regularly gets fawning coverage in the media for their HPC efforts, far more than they should be if you consider their marketshare. It's like PC Magazine going on and on about all the latest developments in the Linux desktop market.

Re:Potentially bogus (1)

LandDolphin (1202876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825707)

It probably has to do with the size of Microsoft as a company, and their place in computing as a whole.

Re:Potentially bogus (5, Insightful)

El Royo (907295) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825725)

Perhaps if "Linux" employed the ad agency Microsoft did you'd be seeing those articles?

Beta test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825295)

Those news probably hit them as hard as it hit us, all they were doing was testing Windows 7 on a machine with the actual recommended specs..

Woo Hoo, Super malware server (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25825453)

Just think how much malware, spyware and bot nets this thing can support before anyone noticed a degradation in performance!!!

Had to be a break-in... (3, Funny)

BronsCon (927697) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825463)

nobody in their right mind would let Windows in willingly.

Vista jokes (1)

k33l0r (808028) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825655)

Cue the Vista jokes now. You know, the ones this:
"Will it run Vista?"
"Finally I can use Aero" ...and so, and so on.

DISCLAIMER: I'm a Linux aficionado, but have to use Vista for development.

Windows systems are in top500 are declining (5, Informative)

Lennie (16154) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825777)

What's missing in the article is that there are only a few windows-based systems in the top500 and there numbers have been declining over the years.

That's all very well... (1)

Pig_Bellamy (1221936) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825805)

But can it digest small felines as well as a GNU/Linux distribution? I think not. I pitty thee who say but not do!

Re:That's all very well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25826247)

All this talk about GNU/Linux' supposed feline digestion capabilities...
I've had dozens of kittens come through here, and even with four computers running Linux, none of them ever vanished.
I'm beginning to suspect it's all just hype..

Norton Antivirus Score? (3, Funny)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825823)

So how many gigaflops does Norton Antivirus use on that puppy?

Windows Genuine Advanatge (1)

A12m0v (1315511) | more than 5 years ago | (#25825975)

.. but are they running genuine Windows?

only 600Gflops (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | more than 5 years ago | (#25826431)

but over a Peta-BSODps
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>