Slashdot Mirror


Red Storm Rising: Cray Wins Sandia Contract

anzha writes "It seems Cray is alive and kicking at least. They might even be making a come back after its very rough time as a part of SGI. The big news? Cray seems to have won the Red Storm contract - Sandia's newest supercomputer procurement - from Sandia National Labs. Check out the press release here. I'd say that this is probably an SV2, but the press release is a bit scant on details."

44 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. bad link to cray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    link on story should be http://www.cray.com not ww

  2. err.. I'm confused? by Drunken+Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wasn't Red Storm a project put forth by Compaq to build a 100 teraflop system?

    --
    Have you been stalked by Seth today?
    1. Re:err.. I'm confused? by HisMother · · Score: 1

      I believe this was a premature announcement, at least as regards this project name. They didn't get the Red Storm contract, although they were a competitor, and the architecture was far from a done deal.

      --
      Cantankerous old coot since 1957.
  3. Care to shed some light? by korpiq · · Score: 3, Funny


    I know something about the problems of multiprocessing, but I would like to know how come monumental systems can still sell in the days of commodity hardware and - oh gosh, not again - Beowulf :). Ok, maybe spread-out computing is not applicable to all kinds of computationally heavy problems, but I'd really like to see some stats on where a monolith like Cray is more applicable and where a multilith like what they use in movie rendering.

    Just pondering while waiting for net-enabled market of processing power (remember processtree?) and storage space (freenet, the new one) to make millionaires of all excessive-hardware owners, through paypal. Well, maybe not :)

    --

    I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
    1. Re:Care to shed some light? by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It all comes doen to inter-cpu bandwidth needs for the particular piece of code you need to run. A render farm has pretty much no need for interprocessor bandwidth, wheras crays have it in the 100's of GBs/s because the kind of numerical physics simulation that is usually run on these beasties needs all the bandwidth it can get, and a little beowulf cluster of x86 toys just ain't gonna gut it.

      --
      Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
    2. Re:Care to shed some light? by bentini · · Score: 5, Informative
      A lot of problems just don't scale well across different systems. Say, fo rinstance, you need to simulate particle interaction...

      Distributed processing is only really good when the subproblems are separate enough that they can be calculated separately.

      Also, supercomputers are a lot better for vector code. Intel and Athlon might say that their current offerings are Vector Processors, but they really aren't. When you need to exploit DLP, supercomputers are the way to go.

      Also, research and funding like this will uncover the techniques that we can expect to be exploited in desktop processors in 5-20 years, so it helps us eventually.

    3. Re:Care to shed some light? by korpiq · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ok, I'm only halfway through the video about SV2 architecture at http://www.cray.com/company/video/ and I already find my question laughable :D

      This stuff is plain cool.

      --

      I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
    4. Re:Care to shed some light? by bjb · · Score: 1

      It is even better when you're strolling through the data center of a fortune 500 company's headquarters, come across two different Cray machines, and go "WOAH! This is the coolest thing I've ever seen!".. I forget the models of the ones I saw, but no custom x86 rig drops my jaw nearly as much.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    5. Re:Care to shed some light? by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure what this new Red Storm machine has in the way of individual nodes, but Sandia has some history in parallel computing, dating back to the paper

      Gustafson, J.L., G.R. Montry and R.E. Benner. "Development of Parallel Methods for a 1024-processor Hypercube." SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing Vol. 9, No. 4, July 1988.
      as well as the ASCI Red machine, which, IIRC, was the first machine to break the 1 teraFLOPS barrier.

      That machine, BTW, was built by Intel out of fastest Pentium chips of the day. I think a later upgrade to Pentium IIs increased its speed to about 3 teraFLOPS.

      As far as MP machines are concerned, it could be argued on the basis of the ASCI Red machine that they have a fairly "economical" strategy [I know, I know, it's hard to argue that anything costing $9e7 as being "economical" - but you are talking about buying one of the fastest few computers in the world - rack mounted Athlon MPs could do great until you get up to O(100) processors, but doing the interconnects for O(10000) processors gets to be tricky].

      Also there is CPlant, their own (everybody's gotta have one) pet project to build a B----- cluster out of Alpha based machines running a modified Linux.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    6. Re:Care to shed some light? by joib · · Score: 2


      Say, fo rinstance, you need to simulate particle interaction...

      Actually most molecular dynamics codes parallelize quite well. Of course you need better bandwidth and latency than seti@home, but nothing a cluster couldn't handle (especially if you have one of them nifty low-latency interconnects).

    7. Re:Care to shed some light? by BWJones · · Score: 2

      but I'd really like to see some stats on where a monolith like Cray is more applicable and where a multilith like what they use in movie rendering.

      In the case of the T3, fecalith might be more appropriate.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  4. SuperComputer Dawrfed by Laptop by Quirk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Being a long time Cray fan and standing in awe of how massive are the undertakings currently being driven by supercomputer, I would normally be impressed. But I just finished reading Seth Lloyd's article at the Edge. The MIT professor of Mechanical Engineering came up with "The amount of information that can be stored by the ultimate laptop, 10 to the 31st bits, is much higher than the 10 to the 10th bits stored on current laptops". I know /. dealt with this recently but reading the prof's thought processes in depth is a fun intellectual high.

    O yah I gotta get me a Beowulf cluster 'o these, baby.



    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
  5. Re:Huh? by imperator_mundi · · Score: 1

    Cray has a long history and a big Legacy and Sigmund Cray was quite a genius, so is not so bad to see that some old good things keep going on.

    Morehover is undoubtful that the existence of supercomputer with superperformance brings to the development of new concepts of applications that later can influence the desktop computer industry.

  6. Another Tom Clancy adaptation ?? by psycho_tinman · · Score: 1, Funny

    Was I the only one who saw "Red Storm Rising" and thought it was about yet another movie adaption of a Tom Clancy novel ? (might be because I read a Sum of all Fears review recently)...

    Hmmm, on second thoughts, maybe it IS just me..

  7. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Don't know about Sigmund Cray, But SEYMOUR Cray might be proud.

  8. Obligatory comment by gokulpod · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does it run Linux ? If so, how much time would it take to compile the kernel.

    --
    My mom never taught me to sign.
    1. Re:Obligatory comment by jsse · · Score: 2

      Does it run Linux ? If so, how much time would it take to compile the kernel.

      Blah, we don't need no OS running a Cray. Legend has it that Seymour Cray (who invented the Cray-1 supercomputer, and most of Control Data's computers) actually toggled the first operating system for the CDC-7600 in on the front panel from memory when it was first powered on. Rumor has it that SV2 bootstrap the brain of the admin in front of it and start cloning...

    2. Re:Obligatory comment by bjb · · Score: 1
      It probably would take quite a while, actually.. Cray machines' strength lies in vector processing. In other words, your BASH shell will run at Pentium 166 speeds while your eigen matrix computation will fly through at 100x the speed.

      I guess you could say its almost like using your nVidia GPU to do your regular computational tasks; it can do it, but it really shines when doing 3D graphics.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
  9. It's still about the time of a coffee break ;) by korpiq · · Score: 1, Funny


    Due to exponential development speed of feature creep, gcc complexity and coffee production, you can still have a coffee break. Just cook the coffee and fill an injector syringe with it before hitting enter. Put the needle between your finger and enter key and push, thus having a coffee needle break as you compile.

    --

    I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
  10. Cray? Nah... by potcrackpot · · Score: 1
    I don't want a cray - I want something like this

    Seriously though - I wonder how much research Cray are doing into the realms of quantum computing? Couldn't find anything about it on the cray website...

  11. generally by martissimo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Crays run a variant of Unix called UNICOS

    too lazy to dig you up a link, and no need to karma whore anyways, just google it or go to cray.com and read about it ;)

  12. Associated clip from the industry standard by jukal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    from: Building a Better Bio-Supercomputer, this one year old newspiece might provide some info on what the system will be:

    <clip> Competitor Compaq is taking a different path. In January, the company announced plans to develop a 100-teraflop bio-supercomputer dubbed Red Storm in partnership with Celera Genomics, the Rockville, Md., company that mapped the human genome, and Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M. Although Blue Gene will be 10 times faster than Red Storm, a Celera executive stresses that the company's machine could eventually match IBM's speed. Unlike Blue Gene, though, Red Storm is being designed for a broader array of life-science experiments and may be used to conduct nuclear research. The supercomputer, set to begin operating in 2004, will cost an estimated $125 million to $150 million to build. </clip>

    This seems to be somewhat in-line with the cost approximate stated in the press release $90 million. Or am I completely in my effort to undestand what this press release is about?

  13. Parallel Processing by beswicks · · Score: 1

    What I really want is a computer that exists in multiple parallel dimensions, so a single piece of hardware has massive (even infinite) parallel processing power.

    Addressing might be a problem tho.

    I wounder if anyone is researching this?...

    1. Re:Parallel Processing by beswicks · · Score: 1

      But as long as the hardware is the bit that is the 'same' but the state of the 'versions?' of the hardware is different its a winner. If fact if you had an infinate number of machines all sightly different from each other the processing task would be done (at least on one of the machines) before you even executed the task. Thats a real time saver. Maybe the system could adapt IMPS for finding the correct answer... c.

    2. Re:Parallel Processing by Quirk · · Score: 1

      for finding the correct answer


      42


      We all know it's 42... Logos... suffer the light

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
  14. Re:Huh? by beswicks · · Score: 1

    You must have a VERY big desk!!! What do you keep under there at the moment a couple of starfires?

  15. More sales.. by mrselfdestrukt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, I believe Cray is gonna sell a lot more High-end systems this year... with Final Fantasy XI being released and all.

    --
    "I used to have that really cool,funny sig ,but it got stolen."
  16. I wonder... by atcurtis · · Score: 1


    Does the Crays still use their esoteric emmitter-coupled logic gates?

    Thats some weird funky logic with negative power rails etc...

    --
    -- The universe began. Life started on a billion worlds...
    -- Except on one where stupidity was there first.
  17. OT: Another Tom Clancy adaptation ?? by Indy1 · · Score: 2

    i thought the same too. Even if it was a movia adaption, i wouldnt get excited. Tom Clancy movies have a BAD habbit of being utterly massacred and turned into crappola compared to the books (The one exception being the Hunt for Red October, which i felt to be pretty decent). Now i know its hard to impossible to make a movie that follows a book perfectly. But after the foul taste of "clear and present danger", which was so far different from the book as to barely deserve the same title as the book, I dont have much hope for future clancy movies. I havent seen sum of all fears yet, I am gonna wait for it to hit rental status first.

    --
    Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
  18. Re:Cray? Nah... by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    They would tell? :))

    Same time, there are documented supercomputers and undocumented ones... Undocumented makes me curious :))

  19. Use to have one down the hall from my desk. by will_die · · Score: 1

    It was in the main entry. It was an old retired one that they had ripped the guts out of and rewired so that the lights still looked liked they worked.

  20. Re:I wonder..., NO, Crays (SV1, 1+ and 2) use CMOS by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The answer to the question is no.. Cray doesn't use ECL for the main beasts any more. That was one of the things that drove them into the ground in the 90's. The Japanese switched to CMOS, and drove the prices way down. Cray eventually followed suit, with their former low-end (YMP-EL which was CMOS based from the get go) spawning the SV1.

  21. god damn it... by paradesign · · Score: 2

    SGI at least tempts us with stuff that will fit on a desk, Cray needs to too cause i want one god damn it!

    --
    I want 2D games back.
  22. thank god, by kinglink · · Score: 1

    As a child I grew up with rumors of these magical cray computers, computers so powerful they would do mere computation or games in the time it takes for our computer to add two numbers.

    Obviously these are not the truth of the power, but they have the power to do more advanced computations then we are able to do on our computer, I felt a little sad when I heard they are closing but now I may one day be able to see one.

    Hopefully Cray will not go the high road still, and make affordable high end PC/mainframes instead of insanely powerful PC/mainframes that make up about half a companies assets. Obviously I don't mean single computers, but their equivilant.

  23. More Info and doh! by anzha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since I submitted this story, Sandia National Labs has released their own press release here. Note that they say, it's an MPP (Massively Parallel Processor), but details to come.

    What's interesing is that Cray has two machines that might be called MPPs:

    1. The T3E with it's single system image, Unicos/mk and Alpha processors.
    2. The Linux Cluster.

    The SV2 might be called a massively parallel vector machine with potentially thousands of vector processors; However, they likely would have said 'vector' in the initial press release. On top of that, Cray would have trumpeted probably quite loudly they'd sold $90 million worth of SV2 because it helps more systems.. That makes me have doubts whether or not its an SV2.

    The MTA doesn't count here either being called a multithreaded architecture rather than a parallel one (semantic hair splitting, yes, but important ones).

    Furthermore, Cray is in the process of discontinuing the T3E because of its age.

    To make it even more delicious is that Red Storm is mentioned a lot in searches at Sandia in conjunction with Cplant. Cplant uses linux...

    So with a little bit of thought that would imply which Cray would be used here?

    Saying 'imagine a beowulf cluster of those' might be a bit more accurate than the joke would normally go. ;) BTW, sorry, I can't believe I missed the w. Is Bush holding it hostage in his name? ;)

    --
    Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
    1. Re:More Info and doh! by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 2

      Dude, your getting a Dell!

      "A world-class Linux cluster solution combining cost-effective hardware from Dell and Cray's world-class services and software for High Performance Computing applications and workloads."

    2. Re:More Info and doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative


      A cluster isn't an MPP.

      The Cray SV2 is an MPP. It is composed of both SSMP and Vector
      technologies and is basically a "next generation" T3E. Where the
      original T3E was an SSI MPP using the Alpha
      microprocessor, it was SSMP only.

      As to why anyone would buy a large system such as an SV2, beyond the
      performance, there is an aspect to manageability, patching and
      testing that really large clusters have a problem with. This in
      combination with the fact that you have to have huge computer rooms
      with power and cooling, where certain agencies are spending up to
      ~100 Million on the physical facilities alone. Then once you have
      your large physical plant and giant cluster, there is a little issue
      of latency. The speed of light is constant, if I have to fetch data
      a few million times from the other end of the room it adds up. All
      of this added together makes spending, say 30 million, on an SV2 look
      like a real bargain.

      It has little to do with the O.S. and more to do with the fundamental
      tools, read architectures, to do the job. Face it, commercial off the
      shelf technology and huge clusters aren't *great* for every problem,
      just like it would be wasteful for most home users to have 8 way SMP's
      in to run Quake, or a word processor on.

    3. Re:More Info and doh! by anzha · · Score: 2

      Better not tell IBM a cluster isn't an MPP. ;)

      In all seriousness though, I agree with with pretty much everything above, except that the Cray guys I know have said that they may evolve a true MPP out of their cluster technology and experiences. With the T3E line mostly dead due to the fact that SGI holds so many of the patents, this makes a lot of sense. Doubly so, since it would also give them time to work on refining linux for their applications: almost universally they praise linux, but say its just not quite there yet for the supercomputing field (other than clusters).

      As for the SV2 being the follow-on to the T3E, um, it it looks like it's more an SV1 follow-on with parts borrowed from the T3E (topology, etc), rather than a scalar processor MPP.

      Any which way, Cray's experience in tools and the HPC world would and will be very useful for the clustering world.

      Just imnsho. ;)

      --
      Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
  24. supercomputer "corporate welfare" by peter303 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Generally the only way large supercomputers can be built in the USA is through government contracts. Industry is unwilling to pay more than $10 million for a large computer. The Department of Energy has been commisioning top-end computers ($10M to $100M) for weapons research and NOAA for weather forecasting.

    I am ambivalant about this. On one hand I want to see a petaflop computer by 2010. (Two 100 teraflop computers have contracted for the 2007 timeframe, so this is possible.) On the other hand I am suspicious that computer companies won't build these on their own and dont like the governement propping up weak computer companies.

  25. Re:Huh? by fgodfrey · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I realize that this is a troll, but I'll reply anyway. The technologies that are invented for super-computing class systems have a way of making their way over time into a machine that you *will* put under your desk. Both MMX and more Altivec (a beefier version of MMX that is in certain PowerPC processors including the ones in I think all current Macs) are based on vector processing technology and ideas originally designed by Seymore Cray in the 70's for the Cray I. So the answer is, everyone cares, even if nobody knows exactly why. I won't pretend that I know exactly what technology from current Crays will end up in desktop systems in 10 years, but *something* probably will. The same can be said for the technology that is in current SGI and IBM (etc) supercomputers.


    For another example, clustering technology (which I'm sure is going to get posted about in this thread) was an attempt to duplicate and borrows ideas from the massively parallel machines like the Cray T3E, the SGI Origin, and the old Thinking Machines boxes.

    --
    Go Badgers! -- #include "std/disclaimer.h"
  26. Re:Super Computer SMP Why by 3th3rn3t · · Score: 1

    well, i use an SMP system as well and i confirm that, the vast majority of application do not natively support SMP and its up to the OS to calculate and mantain some kind of threads for the application.

    But, what does a home box using SMP ( 2 CPU's ) have to do with a supercomputer ? You just cant compare them, can you ?

  27. Re:Huh? by aussersterne · · Score: 2

    Speaking of, when is someone going to start making machines that look as good as those old Thinking Machines CM installations?

    God those were sexy. I'd take one to bed with me now.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  28. Distributed processing by SeanAhern · · Score: 2

    Distributed processing is only really good when the subproblems are separate enough that they can be calculated separately.

    Um...that's not really true. Certainly, distributed processing works like gangbusters when the problem is what's called "embarrassingly parallel". Things like Seti, or distributed ray tracing of a static scene scale perfectly on a distributed system.

    But there are lots of groups (the DOE national labs being some) that do distributed work on problems that are not embarrassingly parallel. The trick is making sure that you have a fast interconnect between the boxes, and can make use of that interconnect efficiently.

    In general, a simulation (including particle simulations) will break up a region of space into pieces, and each piece is calculated for a "time step" on a processor. Then they each determine if they need information from another processor, or if their information could be used by another. A collective communication then takes place to exchange what's needed. Rinse and repeat.

    If you do your work right, you get a scalable system, one where you can add processors and get a proportional increase in performance (or maximum problem size). If you don't do you work right, the system will not scale well.

    Distributed computing is being used for more and more things these days.

  29. Re:Huh? by imperator_mundi · · Score: 1

    Errare humanum est ; )