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!

25th TOP500 List Released

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the winner-has-a-lottaflops dept.

Supercomputing 274

Chris Vaughan writes "The 25th edition of the TOP500 list of the world's fastest supercomputers was released today (June 22, 2005) at the 20th International Supercomputing Conference (ISC2005) in Heidelberg Germany. The No. 1 position was again claimed by the previously mentioned BlueGene/L System. At present, IBM and Hewlett-Packard sell the bulk of systems at all performance levels of the TOP500. The U.S is clearly the leading consumer of HPC systems with 294 of the 500 systems installed there (up from 267 six months ago)."

cancel ×

274 comments

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

Obvious Link? (5, Informative)

yellowbkpk (890493) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882187)

The list can be found here:
http://www.top500.org/lists/plists.php?Y=2005&M=06 [top500.org]

Re:Obvious Link? (1)

neosake (655724) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882206)

Wtf?! did i read it correctly?!
Processors: 65536
That's more than 10 times the earth simulator!

Re:Obvious Link? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882297)

Japanese and American supercomputer technologies are different. You want to compare the performance scores instead. The Rmax values: 136800/35860 = 3.8

Re:Obvious Link? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882287)

Looking at the number of POWER systems on the top500 really shows how braindead a decision by Apple to drop their CPUs at this time. Anyone think it's likely apple will still keep powermacs available after the intel switch, even at a higher price for places like System X?

Re:Obvious Link? (3, Insightful)

spauldo (118058) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882365)

POWER != PowerPC.

PowerPC is _based_ on POWER. The G5 is basically a modified and scaled down POWER 4 chip.

Apple's got other concerns rather than just raw computing power, and they don't need the features that allow you to have more than 4 or so processors in one system. POWER itself isn't designed for small applications - engineering workstations is about as low end as it gets.

It does suck though. PPC's a nice platform.

Re:Obvious Link? (-1, Offtopic)

pootypeople (212497) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882472)

Hate your sig. Nothing like insulting those people who enabled you to do just about everything you do in your life to give you a bullshit ego boost. Insulting teachers is the lowest form of shit. I'm not a teacher myself, but both of my parents are. Teachers put up with this kind of shit all the time from people like you and they still choose to deal with your bratty children for little pay and don't complain when people say callous, bullshit stuff like that. Teachers have more required continuing education than lawyers and doctors, yet we still treat them as almost-professionals instead of professionals. You and your ilk are the problem with the American education system- it's kind of hard to want to bust your ass for a public that is openly contemptuous of your desire to serve them.
Of course, if teachers had done a better job with you, perhaps you wouldn't be so ignorant.
Those who can't teach, bitch about teachers.

Re:Obvious Link? (1)

syphax (189065) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882426)

Look at the trends [top500.org] , though. Power's Top 500 system share peaked in 2000. For better or worse, Intel is on the rise...

Re:Obvious Link? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882561)

How does the number of Power systems (10.4%) and PowerPC systems (5.0%) show that choosing Intel (66.6%) is a braindead decision?

Re:Obvious Link? (1)

quarter (14910) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882567)

What? If you are going to use number of systems as your metric you might want to check it a little closer : 5% for PowerPC vs. 66% for Intel makes it look like a great decision.

Re:Obvious Link? (0)

joeljkp (254783) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882625)

So who here has access to one of these monsters?

I'm logged into #367 [top500.org] right now.

Re:Obvious Link? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882687)

Well I beat you there sister!! I am logged on to #38 [top500.org]

More obvious links (1)

jd (1658) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882638)

For those wanting to know how the figures are calculated, or wanting to calculate them for their own machine, the following links will be helpful:




Dependencies:




I doubt many Slashdotter machines will do well against the top 500, but it might be fun to do our own "top 500" (for sheer geek value and bragging rights).

new /. order evident (1)

essreenim (647659) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882726)

a new low has been reacked. A story acccepted with no link. Thats the funniest ever mam . :)

Keep reaching for the stars. You are special!!

Links are Fun (3, Informative)

TPIRman (142895) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882193)

And here's a link to the actual list [top500.org] . Also interesting is the historical chart of the TOP500 by manufacturer [top500.org] , which tells a story in itself -- the decline of Cray and rise of IBM and Hitachi, for one.

Re:Links are Fun (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882277)

ITYM IBM and HP.

Re:Links are Fun (1)

TPIRman (142895) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882463)

Quite right -- my apologies.

Re:Links are Fun (1)

Elrond (24327) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882338)

I believe you mean HP and not Hitachi.

Link (0, Redundant)

avij (105924) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882194)

How about a link [top500.org] to the new list? Yes, it can be found from the TOP500 [top500.org] website, but that link was missing as well.. clicky clicky.

The full list (0, Redundant)

TheAngryArmadillo (158896) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882199)

For those that thought they might like an actual link to said list:

Here ya go [top500.org] .

Already! (0, Offtopic)

SLASHAttitude (569660) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882209)

One person post a link and it is already slashdoted! Maybe they should try running there web server on something other then a toaster.

Re:Already! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882231)

What the fuck? You on a 9600 baud modem or something? It's fast for me.

Re:Already! (0, Troll)

SLASHAttitude (569660) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882253)

T3, Ass!

Re:Already! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882321)

Shit, that's my fault. I'll stop downloading your obese tranny porn collection with my 100mbit now.

Re:Already! (0, Troll)

SLASHAttitude (569660) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882356)

Damn, I knew it had to be somebody doing that. If you stop maybe I can get to the photos of your mom.

Re:Already! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882427)

Deal. You know the IP.

LINK? (0, Offtopic)

ebynum (716594) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882214)

Where's the link?

So where is the list? (4, Informative)

SeanTobin (138474) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882215)

You'd think that it would be a good idea to actually link [top500.org] to the html list [top500.org] , or the xml list [top500.org] , or the pretty charts [top500.org] .

The press release [top500.org] is interesting too.

Re:So where is the list? (1)

bhsx (458600) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882758)

The interesting thing about those charts are the over 50% unspecified on both. How much of that is clasified government work, and what is it crunching?

Deep Thought (-1, Offtopic)

Daxx_61 (828017) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882217)

I describe myself as the second greatest, and such I am...

Re:Deep Thought (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882467)

"Computers are useless, they only give you answers"
-- Pablo Picasso, speaking from beyond the grave in the fortune file

Derived Moore's Law (4, Interesting)

OlivierB (709839) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882239)

It would be great if we could verify Moore's law through some simple stats using the histrical data from this Top500 list.
-For example:How many years did it take for Number ones on average to be dropped off the 500 list?

- How many years after the list was published did it take personal computers tu make it in the 500list? To make it to the number 1 spot?

- How many transistors did these computers have? Did it verify Moore's law?

- Are we getting more TFLOPS per watt now? Per transistor?
etc..

Re:Derived Moore's Law (0, Troll)

0kComputer (872064) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882307)

If I recall correctly, Moore's law only applies to Silicon Based machines. Supercomputers typically arent silicon based.

Re:Derived Moore's Law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882355)

What are you smoking? Almost everything on the top-500 is essentially a cluster using commodity silicon-based chips.

Yes, at one point, supercomputers used higher-performance "unusual" semiconductors. But it's just too expensive. It's all about bang for your buck now, and that clearly favors silicon chips.

Re:Derived Moore's Law (3, Funny)

LordIvan (103707) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882611)

Yeah, a *real* supercomputer uses vacuum tubes and steam valves.

Re:Derived Moore's Law (1)

ndansmith (582590) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882522)

Maybe we should measure computer performance in more practical terms. Maybe it should be a function of input and output. For how much work the user puts in, how much work does the computer put out? That is the real point of computing, having a machine do work for us, so perhaps it would help to measure power in more concrete terms.

Re:Derived Moore's Law (2, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882603)

That is the real point of computing, having a machine do work for us,

Dude, are you high? Everyone knows the real point of computing is playing games and viewing pornography.

I looked at one of the links (-1, Offtopic)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882242)

I chose the Arts and Entertainment section and scrolled down a bit until I saw a link about online games. Curiousity got me when I saw this in the description:

Choices are presented as icons on the home page (no names, no explanations) but this only heightens the joy of discovery.

So I clicked on the link and what did I see? A site which uses nothing but Flash! What a complete and utter waste of 5 seconds.

Apparently Flash is the new blink tag.

The site in question was orisinal.com in case anyone was wondering.

Re:I looked at one of the links (1)

ZackSchil (560462) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882280)

Orisinal.com is a site that makes flash and shockwave games. Damn good ones too. I'd expect nothing less.

Re:I looked at one of the links (1, Offtopic)

Ochu (877326) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882530)

And so, in being a flash nazi, you have caused yourself to miss out on one of the most entertaining and original websites for a while. Sure, flash is annoying for when HTML will do, but in this case, it won't.

Re:I looked at one of the links (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882691)

Games can easily be programmed in java. I remember when that was all you could find on the web. Nice, simple, easy to play games based on java.

Now everyone thinks that Flash is the way to go because they can throw in more eye candy. Apparently the numerous comments on game playability that come up when talking about game design only apply to console or pc games but not Flash games.

While yes, I do dislike Flash, I have seen one or two pages which use it in a great manner to enhance. Unfortuantely the other 5 billion pages out there which try to use Flash fail miserably.

Want another site that requires one to use Flash? The New York Olympic committes bid for the 2012 Olympics [nyc2012.com] . Why is Flash needed? Other than moving pictures what benefit is there to using Flash over dynamic web pages? None. It's just an excuse to use Flash for the eye candy rather than putting your best forward as to why New York should be chosen.

I'm going on the presumption that the KISS principle isn't in the vocabularies of many web designers nowadays.

AlphaServer holding strong at 12th (0)

NRAdude (166969) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882246)

With a 5 year-old design, Alpha architecture is still holding strong at 12th position;

ASCI Q
ASCI Q - AlphaServer SC45, 1.25 GHz


That'll be the hardware on my list to buy when they decide to move (downgrade) onto crippleware Intel DRM architectures.

Incomplete ranking (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882249)

Why is my beowulf of Mac Mini's not in the list?

Re:Incomplete ranking (2, Funny)

richdun (672214) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882269)

Because my beowulf of Linux-running Nintendo DS machines from the other day beat your Mac Minis.

Imagine... (1, Funny)

Mathiasdm (803983) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882252)

Imagine a Beow...

Hmm, nevermind.

No PS3? (3, Funny)

0kComputer (872064) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882254)

How can this be? I thought it was running at 2+ Terraflops. Didn't anyone watch E3?


Re:No PS3? (3, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882512)

You see, the PS3 runs so fast that it actually broke the light barrier, travelled back in time, and made last year's list.

-Eric

Re:No PS3? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882741)

It was just a marketing way to make people like yourself believe it's more powerful than it really is.

Position #501 (4, Funny)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882281)

And at position #501, OSX running on an Intel processor. Hey, Steve promised it would be fast.

Re:Position #501 (2, Funny)

pHatidic (163975) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882351)

You must be new around here. OS X on Intel isn't faster, it's snappier.

Re:Position #501 (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882666)

And lickable.

A Simple Test. (1)

OctoberSky (888619) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882290)

But how would they fair against being slashdotted?

Link us to thier HDDs please!

You know its coming (1)

dankasfuk (885483) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882292)

//insert generic pr0n joke here

Testing.... (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882295)

Are any of these supercomputers rated for testing BT bandwidth limits.... or making a website /. proof?

Come on Canada! (1)

matrix mechanic (893601) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882298)

The biggest one in Canada, Westgrid's Glacier, adds 600 nodes, and still slips from 54 to 83. This obviously calls for one up man ship. Oh Canada.

Re:Come on Canada! (1)

Spez (566714) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882407)

Thaths so untrue!! University of Sherbrooke is in 40th position. I've seen the system (named Mamooth) and its quite cool :) 1152 Xeon 3.6ghz

Re:Come on Canada! (1)

RandomBitFlipper (847110) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882761)

Yeah - i noticed University of Sherbrooke a couple times on the list... surprised me.

I wonder what they're crunching in the Eastern Townships... calculating the costs of separation from Canada? :-p

surprsing to me (4, Interesting)

udderly (890305) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882304)

What's surprising to me is that Cray used to be synonymous with supercomputers and they now have comparatively few entries.

Re:surprsing to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882465)


Don't forget that Cray was acquired by SGI

Cray is #11, SGI is #3 and #15

Cray was really only on top when they made the FIRST supercomputers. Hard to be beat when you're the only player in the game.

Re:surprsing to me (4, Insightful)

Tenebrious1 (530949) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882546)

What's surprising to me is that Cray used to be synonymous with supercomputers and they now have comparatively few entries.

Why is that suprising in any way? At one time, Ford was synonymous with cars, but today have news of Ford laying off managers. IBM used to be synonymous with the desktop PC, but with the sale of their laptop division are now completely out of the market. Sony Walkman was synonymous with portable music, but now everyone has an iPod.

Cray is just another company that had a great product for a while, but couldn't keep innovating and couldn't keep up when the competition joined the market. Nothing at all suprising about it, it happens all the time.

Where's the Sony PS3? (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882317)

I've been cheated! :(

Choosy Supercomputers prefer *nix (0)

DebianDog (472284) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882323)

Sorry I did not see an anti-M$ post yet ;)

Re:Choosy Supercomputers prefer *nix (2, Funny)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882340)

Sorry I did not see an anti-M$ post yet ;)

Until now.

Re:Choosy Supercomputers prefer *nix (2, Funny)

DebianDog (472284) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882409)

Well I figured since Apple managed a #14 slot M$ could at least "show up" ;-)

Re:Choosy Supercomputers prefer *nix (3, Funny)

Potader (24520) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882577)

... still installing service packs and patches.

Re:Choosy Supercomputers prefer *nix (3, Funny)

AJWM (19027) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882711)

Well, M$ doesn't make hardware.

Actually, come to think of it they do. Where's the Beowulf cluster of XBoxes?

TOP500 List??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882333)

Some TOP500 list, where's the warez, Pr0n, and Roms?

FTFA (1, Flamebait)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882352)

Slashdot has finally evolved to its ultimate form. A story "summary" that links only to a previous Slashdot article. If only this post consisted of only "FR1ST P0ST!", I could retire my userID.

All this computing power (1, Insightful)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882363)

Despite all this computing power, computers still can't think like humans. They can perform calculations faster, but can't perform optimized heuristics or even form optimized heuristics like humans.

Computers are pretty dumb. Humans are amazingly smart.

Re:All this computing power (4, Interesting)

bnavarro (172692) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882572)

Personally, I don't think that Human brains are binary based, logic gate controlled computation machines, and this difference accounts for why we have so much diffuclty with developing strong AI on them.

I do believe, however, that we will eventually "crack the code" to the fundamental archetecture of our brains, and once we do that, we will re-design our computers accordingly, and finally achieve strong AI.

I also believe, that our currently architected computers will play a key role in assisting us with cracking this code.

Re:All this computing power (1)

Bimo_Dude (178966) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882752)

I don't think that Human brains are binary based, logic gate controlled computation machines, and this difference accounts for why we have so much diffuclty with developing strong AI on them.

Every day I see evidence that we have so much difficulty developing strong AI on the Human brain.

Sorry... I couldn't resist ;)

Re:All this computing power (1)

agent dero (680753) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882713)

Computers are pretty dumb. Humans are amazingly smart.

I live in Texas, and..well, beg to differ :-P

I'm confused (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882389)

Why do some machines acheive close to 90% of their theoretical max (Rpeak), while others get only about 50%? Is it communications bandwidth that makes all the difference?

Re:I'm confused (4, Informative)

CardiganKiller (854899) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882519)

It all depends on the system architecture and the type of problem being solved. Certain problems will adhere better to certain architectures and thus allow for a smaller gap between the theoretical and actual performance. The gaps can also be inherent in the architecture itself (e.g. communications bandwidth like you said).

Re:I'm confused (1)

fitten (521191) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882629)

Yup... and the benchmark used for Top500 is pretty simple and is only really relevant to certain algorithms. It's a pretty simple and forgiving benchmark that even clusters can do well on.

Re:I'm confused (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882675)

Uh, for purposes of Top 500 List classification, they are all solving the same problem -- the High Performance Linpack benchmark (solving a system of simultaneous equations via Gaussian elimination with array pivoting). Granted, I beleive some variance in the size of the arrays is allowed, giving more massively parallel machines that can handle larger arrays an advantage.

Re:I'm confused (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882633)

It's "balance" -- peak is just what the FPU can do.

Inter-node communication is a big part of it. (Have a look at % peak obtained by the same CPU over differnet interconnects.)

BlueGene domination (2)

javaxman (705658) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882405)

BlueGene/L max linpack: 136800
Earth Simulator ( #3 on the list ) : 51870

The #1 linpack score is well over twice the #3 linpack score ?!?

That fact combined with the large number of IBM-based systems on the to 100 list really makes it look like IBM is dominating this sector of the market.

You know what data is always missing from this list that we'd all like to see ? The cost of the systems. Although, I suppose if you're looking at building the most powerful computer system on the planet, cost might not be your first consideration...

ThingsI would do (3, Funny)

digitalgimpus (468277) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882425)

Here's a list of things I would do if I had access to one of the systems on that list:

- See how long it takes Windows ME to boot
- See how long it takes pico to open
- run 'top'
- play a wicked ass game of pong
- bitch about having so many CPU's and only 2 USB ports
- see if I could get a video card with dual display support
- fire up a spreadsheet and make a wicked ass multiplication table going really far (like 10X10!) /had an original IBM PC // bored

Re:ThingsI would do (1)

Billy the Impaler (886238) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882538)

Fire up Folding@home and in 24 hours be at the top of the performance rankings. ahhh... the nerdiness.

There's one missing (1)

chrisnewbie (708349) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882439)

I havent seen the "Penis enlargment" hardware,It's everywhere on the net, i assume it would be in that list.

Wrong criterion? (5, Interesting)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882453)

MareNostrum wins hands down for best looking computer room [bsc.org.es] /

AMD on the list. (3, Informative)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882458)

For you rabid fanbois (like me) here is how AMD scored:

Rank Site Country/Year Computer /Processors Manufacturer Rmax Rpeak
10 Sandia National Laboratories
11 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
31 Shanghai Supercomputer Center
32 Los Alamos National Laboratory
33 Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
39 US Army Research Laboratory (ARL)
46 Grid Technology Research Center, AIST
57 Swiss Scientific Computing Center (CSCS)
75 DOE/Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory
76 DOE/Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory
109 The University of Nottingham
144 Automotive Manufacturer (F)
155 Los Alamos National Laboratory
156 Government
167 Universitaet Wuppertal
174 United Institute of Informatics Problems
244 DaimlerChrysler
300 Veritas DGC
306 Ford Motor Company
347 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
348 Japan Adv. Inst. of Science and Technology (JAIST)
388 Umea University / HPC2N
490 Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing
499 Doshisha University

Where is "OS" category? (1)

afroncio (629866) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882473)

I wouldn't be a true Slashdot reader if I didn't point out that you can't sort by operating system in the Top500 database.

But if you could, you'd see Linux prominently displayed.

Re:Where is "OS" category? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882748)

You can somewhat sort out by operating system by looking at this pie chart:

http://www.top500.org/lists/2005/06/overtime.php?c =8 [top500.org]

It's now about less than 350 systems that run Linux (of the 500)!

For all Intel bashers out there... (1)

El Cabri (13930) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882499)

more than half of the top 500 runs on Intel processors, including 77 on Itanium, the rest essentially Xeon, and that's versus 25 AMDs and a quickly fading Alpha.

one teraflop too slow (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882517)

This is the first year the minimum computer speed exceeds a teraflop. Perhaps we sho now define a sumpercomputer as ten sustained teraflops because nineteen have this speed on LINPACK.

Is there one running windows? (1)

mislam (755292) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882548)

Afraid not... ;-)

Top500 Linux (1)

psbrogna (611644) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882552)

Jeeze- a quick scan of the top of the list didn't show any of these gargantuan boxes running Windows. There were however a significant number running Linux. (4 of top 6). Not taking sides or anything (smirk), just an observation.

Re:Top500 Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882627)

Just a quick scan if web browser stats doesn't show a large parcent of peopel using firefox.

just a quick scan of computer desktop usage doesn't show many people runnign Linux.

just a quick scan of dailt websites defacements doesn't show many windows server.

I'm not takign sides or anything (wink)

idiots, all of you, stupid, idiots.

This is really the bottom 500... (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882558)

The real top500 is all top secret and would force you all to wear tinfoil hats constantly.

In all seriousness, I'd be SHOCKED if there weren't 500 more supercomputers in the world that were far faster than any of these that were secretly purchased by government organizations.

Mostly Cloudy (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882559)

With all the more pressing issues for which supercomputers can be used, I don't believe that China is using the 18th fastest computer [top500.org] for weather forecasts. At least not the ones they publish in Xinhua [xinhuanet.com] , anyway. Is there any verifiable way to tell what that machine really does?

Re:Mostly Cloudy (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882747)

For a country with well over a billion people living in a huge land area, I would think that weather forecasting would be very important. I'd hate to have the slave^H^H^H^H^H citizens wiped out by a flash flood.

Misleading rankings (2, Informative)

0xABADC0DA (867955) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882587)

These ranking are based on LINPACK doing traditional operations like solving linear equations, so supercomputers like the Cray MTA [cray.com] aren't even listed even though for some grand challenges they destroy everything else, for example when doing dynamic mesh weather simluations. Each processor on the memory grid has 128 processor threads where the active thread switches every cycle (so memory fetch has huge latency). This lets it have a unified memory model and still have extremely high throughput.

So the MTA can adjust the mesh to compute the tornado in very fine detail while using far fewer points for the huge swaths of calmer weather around it. Traditional supercomputers can't do that well since just distributing the data points to each processor is so much overhead.

Damn Lawrence Livermore (1)

MikeFarrington (144619) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882613)

Lawrence Livermore National Labs have 12 of the top 500! Being a US citizen, I'm not sure wether that's comforting or the scariest thing I've ever read!

Plan Response (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882645)

Supercomputer #72 [top500.org] , at the Chinese Academy of Science, comes from Lenovo. I wonder how far ahead IBM's sale of its "PC" business to Lenovo has put China's computing industry. And I wonder just what kinds of simulations [sorgonet.com] they actually run on the beast.

It takes just 256 computers to make the list... (1)

Harry Balls (799916) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882676)

...if they are coupled really tight (with Myrinet, for instance).

If my employer, a medium size hosting company, decided to get out of the hosting business and into the supercomputer business, we could make the list easily (OK, we'd need to upgrade the Ethernet switches to stacked Gigabit Ethernet switches in order to make the list).

My computer is not on the list! (1)

unixfan (571579) | more than 8 years ago | (#12882689)

Why can't I find my computer on the list? Where is it anyway?
Anyone here seen a black laptop?

rehomo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12882704)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?