Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

IBM Has Plans for a 100 PFlop Supercomputer

Last response: in News comments
Share
September 9, 2011 9:16:31 PM

IBM'S Watson is crying some where.
Score
13
September 9, 2011 9:22:47 PM

But can it run Crysis?
Score
-12
Related resources
September 9, 2011 9:25:37 PM

"Only 15.7 MW" LOL!
Score
21
September 9, 2011 9:31:43 PM

LMAO, i bet it lags in minecraft.
Score
-5
September 9, 2011 9:56:06 PM

on august 10 2011, news came out that IBM drops 10Flop NCSA Supercomputer project because of technical complexity and cost. Now they're going for something 10 times faster. Big Blue going after Big Dream.
Score
0
September 9, 2011 10:09:51 PM

"The patent claims that each processing node will consume about 30 watts of power, which puts the 107 PFlop/s system at only 15.7 MW. That is rather impressive for a system with more than 8 million CPU cores."

That's extremely impressive given the level of peak performance. Many current supercomputers in the 1 Pflop range can consume ~5-10 MW.
Score
3
September 9, 2011 10:13:15 PM

code named, SKYNET
Score
5
September 9, 2011 10:17:15 PM

Doc: "Wait, what did I just say? 1.21 GIGAWATTS?!??!?!"
Score
8
September 9, 2011 10:21:40 PM

Wow... 4 threads per core... I daresay hyperthreading quails before this!
Score
0
September 9, 2011 10:26:32 PM

Finally, something that can handle the spec requirements for Battlefield 3
Score
0
September 9, 2011 10:43:53 PM

retrigBut can it run Crysis?


No No No NO! Wrong!

The CORRECT question is now

But can it play NON-Remastered Crysis? Psssssh!
Score
7
September 9, 2011 11:06:38 PM

The only thing impressive here is the threads and power consumption. If power wasn't an issue I would like to see a CUDA node of this size.
Score
2
September 9, 2011 11:43:16 PM

but can it run crysis 2?
Score
4
September 9, 2011 11:55:16 PM

100 PFLOP/s sounds impressive (although I don't know much about what PFLOP/s exactly refers to) and that is a *** ton of cores..but I'd be more impressed to see that much processing power with way fewer cores. Anyone can add another processor and circuit board to the rack, but improving technology and packing more power into one CPU/board is what its all about. right?
Score
-5
September 10, 2011 12:03:19 AM

That will make a great render farm, Or a batch encoder. Imagine how quickly you can convert 1080p video to 480p for your mobile devices.
Score
0
Anonymous
September 10, 2011 12:05:53 AM

Can it play Crysis 3... thousand?
Score
11
September 10, 2011 12:20:56 AM

Damn.... and I though that the i5 2500K was already fast enough... (from what I've seen) This REALLY makes my 1st gen quad i5 750 look shitty, (and 8GB DDR3 1600) even when I upgrade the gpu to a ati 5770 or something...
Score
-1
September 10, 2011 2:41:31 AM

Good! Good to see IBM still there trying.
Score
3
September 10, 2011 4:23:50 AM

livebriandDamn.... and I though that the i5 2500K was already fast enough... (from what I've seen) This REALLY makes my 1st gen quad i5 750 look shitty, (and 8GB DDR3 1600) even when I upgrade the gpu to a ati 5770 or something...


Yes, some super computers (more as time goes on) do use x86 processors, but the processors used in this planned and current IBM supercomputers use the Power architecture. Keep in mind that the Power architecture is a completely difference beast than x86, designed with with a much different set of goals in mind.
Score
1
September 10, 2011 6:37:12 AM

Considering we're still at 8.12PFLOPS for Fujitsu K, 100PFLOPS is gigantic...
Score
3
September 10, 2011 10:33:20 AM

And IBM's project after this one is a portable nuclear power plant.
Score
2
September 10, 2011 12:47:15 PM

Just give me the money that this thing will use in electricity for one month, I need a new house.
Score
0
Anonymous
September 10, 2011 1:04:52 PM

There is a lot of snubbery in the comments about what IBM can and can't do. Luckily, I am a snubberer.
Score
1
September 10, 2011 4:25:04 PM

Why can't ordinary software developers take a page or two off these highly parallel supercomputers? If the software that runs on these things can take advantage of thousands or millions of cores at once, why can't, for example, game developers even take advantage of four cores properly?
Score
6
September 10, 2011 7:27:36 PM

er and they need this power for....???
Score
0
September 10, 2011 10:23:06 PM

man, I had a plan for one of these once...
too bad my unicorn ate it...
Score
2
September 10, 2011 10:55:37 PM

ronch79 said:
Why can't ordinary software developers take a page or two off these highly parallel supercomputers? If the software that runs on these things can take advantage of thousands or millions of cores at once, why can't, for example, game developers even take advantage of four cores properly?


There is a huge difference between the problems game programmers have to solve and the problems supercomputers run. Supercomputing applications operate on HUGE data sets. Furthermore, the underlying problems on supercomputer being solved allow programmers can be solved complerely in parallel. Basically, each data element can be processed more or less independently, with only the occasional synchronization needed. Games on the other hand are full of serial code that must be run in a certain order, and unlike supercomputing there are few opportunities to simply spin up dozens (or thousands) or cores and have each core chew through each block independently.
Score
1
September 10, 2011 11:59:25 PM

jprahmanThere is a huge difference between the problems game programmers have to solve and the problems supercomputers run. Supercomputing applications operate on HUGE data sets. Furthermore, the underlying problems on supercomputer being solved allow programmers can be solved complerely in parallel. Basically, each data element can be processed more or less independently, with only the occasional synchronization needed. Games on the other hand are full of serial code that must be run in a certain order, and unlike supercomputing there are few opportunities to simply spin up dozens (or thousands) or cores and have each core chew through each block independently.


Spell check pls...got a little confused ;) 
Score
1
Anonymous
September 11, 2011 2:45:21 PM

You will all be dead when this power will come in desktop size :(  Unless people find out about genetic manipulation to live longer. No war no diseases...etc
If it's even possible to make a supercomputer hat small and the evolution of hardware stays the same.(cloud computing controlling super computers like this from home...that's just not the same :) 
Score
0
September 11, 2011 8:53:53 PM

I bet it will be a big Flop.
Score
5
!