Slashdot Mirror


IBM's Blue Gene Runs Continuously At 1 Petaflop

An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet is reporting on IBM's claim that the Blue Gene/P will continuously operate at more than 1 petaflop. It is actually capable of 3 quadrillion operations a second, or 3 petaflops. IBM claims that at 1 petaflop, Blue Gene/P is performing more operations than a 1.5-mile-high stack of laptops! 'Like the vast majority of other modern supercomputers, Blue Gene/P is composed of several racks of servers lashed together in clusters for large computing tasks, such as running programs that can graphically simulate worldwide weather patterns. Technologies designed for these computers trickle down into the mainstream while conventional technologies and components are used to cut the costs of building these systems. The chip inside Blue Gene/P consists of four PowerPC 450 cores running at 850MHz each. A 2x2 foot circuit board containing 32 of the Blue Gene/P chips can churn out 435 billion operations a second. Thirty two of these boards can be stuffed into a 6-foot-high rack.'"

10 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Hitting 3 petaflops takes an 884,736-processor[ by Timesprout · · Score: 5, Funny

    will there ever be such a thing as too many cpus???
    There will be if all those cpus decide there are too many humans.
    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  2. Slashdot needs to be reported! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For harboring petaphiles!

  3. Has no one beaten me to it? by danbert8 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of THESE!

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
  4. Re:I'm ignorant. by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah... I see the issue. I know this is hard to comprehend, but I hear of this group of people called "outsiders". For some reason, these people don't always sit in front of a computer. They go outside (hence the name). They do things like stand on objects that are buoyant in water and catch aquatic animals.

    They go to large gatherings to hear poor versions of music (with all the ambient noise, I don't understand why they don't just put ona pair of headphones and listen on their PC).

    They go to large wooded areas to get "fresh air" and "exercise".

    And while these are, admittedly, very bizarre behaviors, these people like to know what the weather is going to be like. To each his own I say.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  5. Re:Hitting 3 petaflops takes an 884,736-processor[ by foobsr · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you have not read it yet: The Cyberiad: Fables for the Cybernetic Age .

    From the page/book: ".. There are legends, as you know, that speak of a race of paleface, who concocted robotkind out of a test tube, though anyone with a grain of sense knows this to be a foul lie... For in the Beginning there was naught but Formless Darkness, and in the Darkness, Magneticity, which moved the atoms, and whirling atom struck atom, and Current was thus created, and the First Light... from which the stars where kindled, and then the planets cooled, and in their cores the breath of Scared Statisicality gave rise to microscopic Protomechanoans, which begat Protermechanoids, which begat the Primitive Mechanisms. These could not yet calculate, nor scarcely put two and two together, but thanks to Evolution and Natural Subtraction they soon multiplied and produced Omnistats, which gave birth to the Servostat, the Missing Clink, and from it came our progenitor, Automatus Sapiens..."

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  6. What about Memory? by sluke · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently had a chance to see Francois Gygi, one of the principal authors of qbox (http://eslab.ucdavis.edu/) which is a quantum electronic structure code that has set some performance records on the Blue Gene/L at Livermore. He mentioned that the biggest challenge he faced was the very small amount of memory available to each node of the Blue Gene (something like 256Mb). This forced him to put so much emphasis on the internode communications that simply changing the order of the nodes where the data was distributed in the machine (without changing the way the data itself was split) affected performance by over 100%. This will only get worse as the number of cores per board goes from 2 to 4 on the Blue Gene/P. I couldn't find anything in a quick google search, but does someone know what the plans are for the memory on this new machine?

  7. Depends on what you mean by real world. by jd · · Score: 5, Informative
    If you include medical imaging, then computed tomography and computational fluid dynamics are heavily dependent on 3D FFTs, which are in turn heavily parallelizable. In extreme cases (raytracing, for example) where there is next to zero communication between nodes, you get linear scaling with the number of nodes for as many nodes as you like. Well, in the case of raytracing, up to the resolution your "camera" works at. On a modern display, you may be talking one million or so distinct originating points at three colours, typically using "bundles" of rays to eliminate effects, which would normally be 64 rays in size. With something like 250 million cores, you could actually generate an animated feature film from raw data files at the time of showing.

    How many of these are "real world"? Well, medical and CFD applications are significant, but hardly what you'd call mainstream, and the raytracing may have been used in Titanic on a smaller scale, but IMAX is under no threat at this time.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Depends on what you mean by real world. by jd · · Score: 5, Informative
      Thank you for the compliment. It's equally nice to know that there are active questioners on Slashdot determined to stretch the quality to the limits. In the spirit of providing information, though, I'll add a few links for the perusal and amusement of all. I'm hard on some of the software, but that's not because I could do better. If anything, it's because I have confidence the authors could.

      Let's start with a Slashdotting of NASA...

      • Kerrighed is an up-and-coming clustering system for Linux. I saw it demonstrated at SC|05 - and was less than impressed. It needed a lot of work at that point. However, it looks like it has improved a lot since then, and it would be unreasonable to not mention it.
      • MOSIX is the second-oldest clustering technology to gain a fan following to rival Star Trek. It's very good, though hard to get if you're not in academia. Arguably for entirely fair reasons.
      • OpenMOSIX was originally a fork from MOSIX but is now essentially its own clustering technology. Development is nowhere near the speed I'd like, it does need far more eyes, but is well-known and highly regarded. Moshe Bar is also one of the coolest developers I've encountered.
      • DAKOTA is a program for profiling parallel applications and should be useful in telling you where you are gaining and losing.
      • HPC Toolkit is another toolkit for profiling HPC applications.
      • is yet another profiler for parallel software. Between this and the others I've listed, you should have more information than sequential programmers ever get to work with.
      • Performance API is a facility used by most of the profiling software to provide an architecture-independent view of performance counters. I have it on good authority that some (now former)
      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  8. How far behind are desktops from super-computers? by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Years ago, shortly after the Pentium first came out and the then astounding "x million flops/second" numbers were floating around, I wondered how far we were behind the power of supercomputers. I remember doing some rough calculations and finding that only a few pentiums could do the calculations of a Cray 1. I don't remember the specifics of how many pentiums/cray, or how rough the calculation was, but that's largely unimportant for my point.

    So I have to wonder, what's the equivalent supercomputer that a modern, hefty desktop is capable of performing at? 10 years ago, 20 years ago? Have super-computers accelerated in terms of the speed of increased computing power, stayed the same, or fallen behind desktops?

    --
    AccountKiller
  9. Re:what am I missing? 850Mhz = slow? by davidbrit2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What am I missing?
    The other 4,095 of them.