Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

NASA kickin' butts and takin' names

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 20, 2006 11:43:23 PM

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...
April 20, 2006 11:46:23 PM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...


AMD doesn't have a processor that can scale 512 processors on a node sadly.
April 20, 2006 11:59:31 PM

So anyone knows what's the 3DMark06 score for this rig? :lol: 
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
April 21, 2006 12:00:56 AM

Quote:
AMD doesn't have a processor that can scale 512 processors


I am running 513 Athlon 4800+ on a node with no problem.

,,
April 21, 2006 12:13:04 AM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...


AMD doesn't have a processor that can scale 512 processors on a node sadly.

Can you imagine the electric bill on that thing? 8O
April 21, 2006 12:16:24 AM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...
<YELLING ACROSS THE FORUMZ>


DAMN YOU INTEL AND YOUR PLANTS IN NASA DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 21, 2006 12:29:57 AM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...
<YELLING ACROSS THE FORUMZ>


DAMN YOU INTEL AND YOUR PLANTS IN NASA DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Fanatics.... :roll:

May Allah be merciful to AMD, god willing.
April 21, 2006 12:32:20 AM

wonder if it can compute Pie ...


..... watch it explode creating a mushroom cloud the size of texas


8O




Nasa would get p00ned
April 21, 2006 12:35:35 AM

Hmmm well it would probably take somewhere on the order of <1 sec and black out all of Orlando. :lol: 
April 21, 2006 12:50:59 AM

Beware, though! All that potential doesn't make statements like this one to be true:
Quote:
"These mergers are by far the most powerful events occurring in the universe, with each one generating more energy than all of the stars in the universe combined," said Dr. Joan Centrella, who leads the Gravitational Astrophysics Laboratory at Goddard.


Correctly put, it should read "more energy than that released (within a certain time delta) by all of the stars..."


Cheers!
April 21, 2006 12:51:38 AM

Quote:
wonder if it can compute Pie ...


..... watch it explode creating a mushroom cloud the size of texas


8O




Nasa would get p00ned
This is going straight into my sig.
April 21, 2006 1:00:11 AM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...
<YELLING ACROSS THE FORUMZ>


DAMN YOU INTEL AND YOUR PLANTS IN NASA DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Fanatics.... :roll:

May Allah be merciful to AMD, god willing.

Can't you take a joke?
April 21, 2006 1:22:18 AM

All that thousands of cpu put to work to simulate a black hole and still them scientist did not find a permanent cure for common cold. What a waste of money, to be exact our money. I would imagine that supercomputer got a super tag of millions of dollars from the tax payers. I hope that blackhole can cure cancers and make peace and it would be worth it.

I assume those big things on top of them supercomputers are the SLI bridges.
April 21, 2006 1:35:08 AM

Quote:
All that thousands of cpu put to work to simulate a black hole and still them scientist did not find a permanent cure for common cold. What a waste of money, to be exact our money. I would imagine that supercomputer got a super tag of millions of dollars from the tax payers. I hope that blackhole can cure cancers and make peace and it would be worth it.


Actually, they're (SC) used to gene decoding and for an endless amount of research, in more areas than you can count (cancer research & common cold included); as for peace... forget about it! :D 

Quote:
I assume those big things on top of them supercomputers are the SLI bridges.


:lol:  :lol:  :lol: 


Cheers!
April 21, 2006 1:48:22 AM

Also since NASA is not running X86 code (or at least I do not think they are) Itanics dont carry all that old bagage and are faster then AMD CPU's and before the AMD fanatics go "then why dont they use them in servers more" well thats becouse you need to run X86 code on your server and Itanics can only run it through emulation... therefore they are slower at that (You can blame Intel for being stupid in that respect lol)
April 21, 2006 2:00:31 AM

Quote:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/universe/gwave_feat...

Nasa's supercomputer.

It consists of a 10,240-processor SGI Altix system comprised of 20 nodes, each with 512 Intel Itanium 2 processors, and running a Linux operating system

They should have went with AMD...



Which explains perfectly why they cant convert from SAE to metric correctly, and keep crashing probes into mars and losing satelites
April 21, 2006 2:50:53 AM

Quote:
This is going straight into my sig.



WHY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




:wink:
April 21, 2006 4:45:48 AM

Quote:
Can't you take a joke?


Of course i can... AMD jihad cracks me up. Praise Allah!! Oops i mean AMD!
April 21, 2006 5:55:14 AM

Quote:
Which explains perfectly why they cant convert from SAE to metric correctly, and keep crashing probes into mars and losing satelites


That only happened once, and NASA has successfully landed more probes on and put more sattelites into orbit around Mars than any other country/organization (I'm not positive, but you might be able to stick a "combined" at the end of that phrase)

Quote:
All that thousands of cpu put to work to simulate a black hole and still them scientist did not find a permanent cure for common cold. What a waste of money, to be exact our money. I would imagine that supercomputer got a super tag of millions of dollars from the tax payers. I hope that blackhole can cure cancers and make peace and it would be worth it.


Umm, one thing that NASA does with supercomputers is figure out where Near Earth Objects are going to end up in a hundred and fifty years so that we know if we need to be trying to nudge them in a different direction to keep it from hitting earth and wiping out humanity. Orbital mechanics are dang complicated, and trying to calculate something like that out that far is just insane. Plus, there are a few thousand space things flying aroud the earth that need to be tracked so that you don't lauch a spacecraft (especially one carrying people) into the path of a sattelite (or a screwdriver that someone "dropped" during an EVA) that is flying 5000 mph relative to the spacecraft. Tracking all that takes a lot of crunching power. Oh yeah, there's also computational fluid dynamics. Calculating hypersonic flows around the latest and greatest research scramjets takes a little more computing power than what you have sitting next to your desk right now (unless you have a couple of thousand years and a very, very stable system). The long and short of it is that it is used for aeronautics and space research. Ever flown on an aircraft to get anywhere? If so, then don't badmouth NASA spending money on something like this because without government supported research modern day aviation would be a fry cry from what it is.
April 21, 2006 6:27:34 AM

Read the paragraph again and you will see that my subject is about the "Blackhole". :roll:
April 21, 2006 7:01:48 AM

Here another fact for u Nasa also only use 286 or 386 in shuttles. Why well there less error Prone then newer cpus.

Then I bet When Nasa started useing Itanium 2. I would guess Amd or Intel 64s where not out. So they could of save alot of money useing amd or intel Dual cores.

Itanium 2 is the lamest chip out. But Nasa already had Most of the software writen up for it.
April 21, 2006 8:05:48 AM

The Itanium is not a lame chip when it comes to the NASA usage, no other chip has the FPU performance of the Itanium.
Yes it isn't that strong in integer, compared to other chip, but if you compare on a clock for clock basis it is still faster than anything else in integer.
The current top of the line Itanium runs at a meagre 1.6Ghz with 9mb of L3 cache.
Yes scalability with number of CPUs goes down quite considerably, but you can have more than 8 sockets on a motherboard. You can't do that with Opteron or Xeon.
I wouldn't use the itanium for a normal business server, in the 4 to 8 socket range, as most of the workload is integer (web servers, Finance, Sales, etc,etc) as there are better and cheaper architectures out there, but for pure 64bit FPU grunt, I'd go with Itanium
April 21, 2006 8:10:04 AM

ahh..............................those NASA dudes..they know more then all of us put together and multiplied by 512 :lol: 


i`m still wondering ... can it make pan-cakes.. `cause i`m kind of hungry
April 21, 2006 9:30:54 AM

That is one power black hole.
April 21, 2006 9:32:44 AM

http://www.top500.org/lists/2005/11/basic

Only ~18% as fast as #1... Guess they should taka a few more names, like IBM and PowerPC, a bit more seriously.

Last year they were # three and the year before they were # two...

I think that the NEC Earth Simulator has held top spot longest.

Have fun with the list, all!
!