Slashdot Mirror


Asus Releases Desktop-Sized Supercomputer

angry tapir writes "Asustek has unveiled its first supercomputer, the desktop computer-sized ESC 1000, which uses Nvidia graphics processors to attain speeds up to 1.1 teraflops. Asus's ESC 1000 comes with a 3.33GHz Intel LGA1366 Xeon W3580 microprocessor designed for servers, along with 960 graphics processing cores from Nvidia inside three Tesla c1060 Computing Processors and one Quadro FX5800."

18 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Hrmm by acehole · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many pets would I have to eat to balance out the carbon footprint of this?

    I've got a six-pack of kittens at the ready.

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Hrmm by wisty · · Score: 5, Funny

      The PSU is only 1100W. It's not that intensive - three teslas are like three big graphics cards. 2 or 3 kittens would be sufficient, so you've got enough to share.

      Do you have pepper sauce?

  2. Boinc Applications... by Xin+Jing · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a participant in the Milky Way and SETI projects for BOINC, I can say this development is impressive and would be a cruncher's dream come true. It would put supercomputing power in the hands of the everyman and allow applications that rely on distributed computing to take a leap forward.

    1. Re:Boinc Applications... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More importantly can this actually run Crysis 2? Probably not.

  3. Super computer? by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ummm isn't this just a ridiculously powerful desktop computer rather than a super computer? The current 500th super computer on the top500 list is this machine which has a Rmax of 17 Tflops and an Rpeak of just over 37.6. Now its impressive that this desktop system has 1/37th of the power of the lowest machine on the super computer list... but does that really make it a super computer? Moore's Law says that it will take around 10 years for this desktop box to evolve to the power of that current bottom top500 box. So in other words its 10 years behind the performance of the current 500th best super computer.

    If its because it hits 1 Tflops then in a few years time you'll have mobile phone "super computers" as Moore's Law is still moving onwards.

    This is a very very fast desktop computer suited to certain simulation elements which are GPU intensive. Nice box, fast box.... but not a real modern super computer.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Super computer? by Kumiorava · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Supercomputer is a computer that is one of the most powerful computers available at a given time. Therefore referring top500 list is very valid when determining what is supercomputer and what isn't. Top500 list can very well be used in determining whether we have a supercomputer or not. If the modern computer isn't faster (at least in certain specific tasks) than the lowest performing computer on the list I wouldn't consider it being a supercomputer. I don't understand the need to dilute supercomputer word to include cheap hacks like this, there are valid names for these such as minicomputer. What do we call the best performing computer? superdupercomputer?

  4. But how can you trust the results? by HalfFlat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Tesla c1060 processor boards sound like a very efficient way of packing in compute power, but unless they're neglecting to mention it, the 4GB of GDDR3 RAM each has on board has no error correction. Given the rates of correctable errors observed e.g. here, I could never recommend using it for computing simulations that matter. A flipped bit in a floating point number can have a disproportionate affect on the outcome of calculations that rely upon it, and short of running the whole simulation a second or third time, one couldn't be confident that such an error did not occur.

    Large compute-intensive simulations can take weeks, and are used to justify engineering and business decisions that involve the disposition of large amounts of money and other resources — it is important that the computational part of the process can be relied upon.

    1. Re:But how can you trust the results? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm a student at the University of Washington and once talked to a representative for Cray about using GPU's a a cheaper supercomputer and he told me that they generally have a nontrivial error rate. The issue with using ECC memory is that the GPU's are also libel for errors within their computations, making the ECC RAM pointless. A weird pixel in one frame of a game is no problem, but an error when performing a large simulation creates problems if the algorithm isn't designed to compensate for that noise.

    2. Re:But how can you trust the results? by mkaushik · · Score: 5, Informative

      Then you would be happy to know that Nvidia's new Fermi chip supports ECC throughout the architecture.

    3. Re:But how can you trust the results? by bertok · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Tesla c1060 processor boards sound like a very efficient way of packing in compute power, but unless they're neglecting to mention it, the 4GB of GDDR3 RAM each has on board has no error correction. Given the rates of correctable errors observed e.g. here, I could never recommend using it for computing simulations that matter. A flipped bit in a floating point number can have a disproportionate affect on the outcome of calculations that rely upon it, and short of running the whole simulation a second or third time, one couldn't be confident that such an error did not occur.

      Large compute-intensive simulations can take weeks, and are used to justify engineering and business decisions that involve the disposition of large amounts of money and other resources — it is important that the computational part of the process can be relied upon.

      Which is why the upcoming NVIDIA "Fermi" GPU based boards will support 4GB of ECC memory. Also, they'll have about 2 TFLOPS of single-precision power, and you can stack 4 of them in a box = 8 TFLOPS beside your desk.

      I can't wait until the US government starts banning these things because they could be used by terrorists to design nuclear weapons or something. 8)

  5. Re:No point running desktop Windows on this monste by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I wouldn't choose to do my scientific computing on Windows, I know some people do, and those Tesla cards (which are providing the bulk of the processing power) really don't care which OS you're running.

    --
    [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
  6. Eat a vacuum cleaner by syousef · · Score: 4, Funny

    The PSU is only 1100W. It's not that intensive - three teslas are like three big graphics cards. 2 or 3 kittens would be sufficient, so you've got enough to share.

    1100W? Can I eat my vacuum cleaner instead? Yummy.

    Do you have pepper sauce?

    Pepper sauce? Pepper sauce?!? Do you have any idea what the carbon footprint of pepper sauce is? My brother ate pepper sauce once. He had to eat a whole zoo full of animals to make up for it! Stay away from the sauce!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Eat a vacuum cleaner by Fred_A · · Score: 5, Funny

      >Pepper sauce? Pepper sauce?!? Do you have any idea what the carbon footprint of pepper sauce is? My brother ate pepper sauce once. He had to eat a whole zoo full of animals to make up for it! Stay away from the sauce!

      But it's *green* pepper !

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
  7. Thats not a super desktop computer idea by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Interesting
    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  8. Re:No point running desktop Windows on this monste by hherb · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nah - with such processing power, one might actually see a Windows machine perform properly! From boot to blue screen of death in mere milliseconds! Run your malware faster than ever! See clippy dance furiously across the screen in smooth 250 fps animation!

  9. How about non Floating Point performance ? by Gori · · Score: 4, Insightful

    San somebody who has actually worked with such machines enlighten me about its performance on tasks that are not floating point intensive? Our simulations mainly push many,many objects around, with relatively little, or no floating point math in them.

    Do such machines still make sense, or are we better off with a bunch of general purpose CPUs clustered together? How do they compare to Suns Niagara cpus that have umpteen hardware threads in them ?

    --
    Complexity is a measure of our ignorance...
  10. Re:No point running desktop Windows on this monste by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes indeed. Who in their right mind would run anything GPU-intensive on Windows? The platform is well known for having absolutely terrible video drivers. I hear that most manufacturers don't even support the platform, and just expect the community to write drivers!

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Not an Eee! by quenda · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was expecting it to be called the Eee-1. But EEE-niac would have been cool too.