backtop


Print 13 comment(s) - last by markhahn.. on Nov 27 at 3:15 PM

Computer offers 958 megaflops performance per watt

NVIDIA announced this week that it has the most energy efficient supercomputer capable of petaflop class performance, and that machine is powered by NVIDIA Tesla GPUs. The computer is the Tsubame 2.0 system that is in place in the Tokyo Institute of Technology.
 
The machine is ranked as the greenest super computer in the petaflop class according to the Green500 list.
 
This list is published two times a year and this is the second time that NVIDIA has won. NVIDIA claims that this machine is three times more energy efficient than comparable CPU-based machines in the same class.
 
The NVIDIA-powered Tsubame 2.0 heterogeneous supercomputer is used for scientific research in Japan and offered sustained performance of 1.19 petaflops and consumed 1.2 megawatts of power delivering 958 megaflops per watt of energy. The closest x86 CPU only machine was the Cielo Cray supercomputer used at the Los Alamos National Lab with 278 megaflops per watt of performance.
 
The Tsubame 2.0 machine uses HP ProLiant SL390 servers with Intel Xeon CPUs accelerated by Tesla GPS. The Tesla GPUs give the machine more than 80% of its performance. NVDIA also points out that five of the most efficient computers on the list use GPUs and CPUs.

Source: NVIDIA



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Green huh?
By TSS on 11/24/11, Rating: 0
RE: Green huh?
By Tunnah on 11/24/2011 4:05:26 PM , Rating: 2
although i understand where you're coming from, the green moniker is valid as it's design intention was to do something that another product does but using less power, either by the way of more efficiency or less power usage (or in this case, both)

although i wouldn't use the term green when the difference is negligible, here that isn't the case as the difference is huge


RE: Green huh?
By Tunnah on 11/24/2011 4:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
although i understand where you're coming from, the green moniker is valid as its design intention was to do something that another product does but using less power, either by the way of more efficiency or less power usage (or in this case, both)

although i wouldn't use the term green when the difference is negligible, here that isn't the case as the difference is huge


RE: Green huh?
By spread on 11/24/2011 8:36:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Just call it what it is, the most efficient super computer.


Efficiency is very "green". That's the whole point, doing more while consuming less.


RE: Green huh?
By Icebain on 11/24/2011 9:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
Green can also mean you keep more "green" in your bottom line, by being more efficient. I realize the commonly accepted moniker for "green" is to mean environmentally friendly, but cold hard cash is also green.


Hrm
By Thomaselite14 on 11/24/2011 12:42:02 PM , Rating: 2
Intel must not be pleased.




RE: Hrm
By TSS on 11/24/2011 12:52:53 PM , Rating: 2
Hah, a super computer made from intel HD graphics. Now that would be funny.


RE: Hrm
By Ticholo on 11/24/2011 2:48:54 PM , Rating: 2
Either funny or impossible.


RE: Hrm
By someguy123 on 11/24/2011 7:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
Why? a bunch of the top supercomputers are intel cpus with nvidia gpus, though the leader uses SPARC.


Missing points
By vignyan on 11/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Missing points
By dark matter on 11/24/2011 3:19:48 PM , Rating: 2
Umm, sorry to break this to you, but do you think super computers are built with diversity in mind? Can you imagine the engineers saying

"umm, dunno about going with the GPU's Jim, there a bit hard to program and are only good for certain tasks, like climate modelling, physic dynamics, and statistical computations"

"yeah bob, we don't want to limit our audience for our multi million pound niche product"

"exactly Jim, exactly"


RE: Missing points
By inighthawki on 11/24/2011 3:30:33 PM , Rating: 2
So what you're suggesting is,
we build supercomputer architectures to act more like a CPU, for general purpose programming, and be less efficient, so that a bunch of people who shouldn't even be using a super computer for their calculations can now say they need to?

Please give me what "general purpose tasks" people would need a super computer for? They are designed almost entirely for raw calculation, not performing a couple hundred/thousand general purpose tasks at once.


RE: Missing points
By markhahn on 11/27/2011 3:15:53 PM , Rating: 1
you are absolutely correct. GPUs are quite specialized, and it's becoming more and more clear that they're hard to use. there are some fairly narrow niches that do well in GPUs, and for people working in those niches, GPU clusters make a lot of sense. as it happens, top500 is pretty much a penis-size contest, and GPUs do well on Linpack. that doesn't mean they're going to rule the world.

Intel's MIC is very much going in the opposite direction: scalable, general-purpose compute power that will accelerate most applications. if rumors are right that their current chip is in the 250W range for 1 Tflop, it will certainly be more attractive than GPUs.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki