Slashdot Mirror


Transmeta Meets Blades

The Griller writes "Gordon Bell, one of the creators of VAX, and Linus Torvalds were at the launch of a new supercomputing platform at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Based on Crusoe processors from Transmeta and running a version of linux, it is aimed at being cheaper than conventional supercomputers by requiring no cooling and lower maintenance. " Basically, it's blade clustering, using Beowulf.

6 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Slashdotted ALREADY?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
  2. Forget Beowulf by guttentag · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine if these weren't clustered...

  3. transmeta.com by jbrw · · Score: 5, Informative
    transmeta.com has more information on why a Crusoe based solution was selected.

    It all comes down to "power consumption, size, reliability and ease of administration", apparently.

    And the marketing people at RLX Technologies should be shot for not having a press release up for this, as it's all based on their product...

  4. Post-X86 clustering by baka_boy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Personally, I'd much rather have a rack of XServe 1U boxes than Transmeta chips -- G4 processors may not be quite as power-efficent as Transmetas, but they also run at higher clock speeds, have two processors per mobo, give you fast 128-bit vector processing unit (very nice for scientific calculation), and still beat the pants off of PIII/IV and Athlon chips in the power/heat/size arena.


    The only trick would be getting the things to work properly in a headless configuration -- Apple won't ship them without a graphics card, but I'm relatively certain that you could get a LinuxPPC installation to work even without the card installed.

  5. Interesting Wording... by evilviper · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Gordon Bell, one of the creators of VAX, and Linus Torvalds"

    Wow, so it is true... Linus is a robot.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  6. Why Crusoe? Administration Costs? by chill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Using this site as an example to estimate power usage, we get:
    240 computer blades in Green Destiny x 6,480 hours uptime (9 months) = 1,555,200 computer hours of uptime

    Assuming the only thing changed on the blade is the CPU -- and North Bridge chipset, since the Crusoe includes
    a North Bridge on die
    and the P-III does not -- at full blast the Crusoe consumes about 1.75W of power and the
    P-III + NB consumes between 4.5 - 8 W, depending on chip model. However, the 4.5W number is an approximation
    from the 0.13 micron ULV P-IIIM chip running in "Battery Saving" mode, or SpeedStepped down to 300 MHz. Running
    at full 700 MHz tilt, with NB, we are still talking 5.75W of power consumed.

    1,555,200 * 0.0175Kw * 0.10 (dollar per KwH power cost) = $2,721.60 electricity cost/year (Crusoe)
    1,555,200 * 0.0575Kw * 0.10 (dollar per KwH power cost) = $8,942.40 electricity cost/year (Intel)

    A saving of approx. $6,200/year in direct electric costs.

    However, the big savings comes from the heat dissipation of the units. While the newer LV/ULV P-IIIs do not require
    active cooling, they still run quite a bit warmer than the Crusoe units. As a result, you don't stick a rack
    full of them in a room that isn't temperature controlled. The difference in the air conditioning bill can
    easily reach tens of thousands of dollars.

    In business, there are two types of money/budgets. One-time grants and acquisition budgets are large chunks of
    cash. Recurring expense and operations budgets are smaller. Being able to get a large chunk of cash to BUY a
    cluster/supercomputer is one thing. Being able to go back year-after-year and get the funds to keep it running
    is another project altogether. $15,000 - $20,000/year for electricity used in running/cooling computers is a
    LOT of money to some people. This doesn't include construction or maintenance costs on a custom facility/room.

    As far as reduced administration costs go, many conventional supercomputers required chilled water and other
    special considerations for operation. People with experience managing things like Sun E15000s and Cray T3Es
    are few and far between. They are the last of the "high priesthood" of computer administrators and cost a LOT
    of money to employ.

    A blade server, on the other hand, is a bunch of x86 computers running Linux -- nothing a couple of grad students
    can't learn the ins-and-outs of over a term. Maintenance contracts, spare parts, etc. are also TONS cheaper for
    the blade/cluster solution as opposed to high-end SGIs, Suns, Fujitsu and Cray super-computers.

    Another site with a bit of good supporting information is
    PC Stats.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.