We often get interesting requirements for clusters. Sometimes we speak to people who believe that clock frequency defines the speed of the unit, so therefore, a 3.6 GHz processor must be faster than a 2.66 GHz processor. This is not the case (clock frequency == performance), but it has been hammered home by one OEM (cough cough) for a long time, so their customers are attuned to it. Makes it hard to explain to a customer how a 2.66 GHz Woodcrest could best a 3.6 GHz Xeon. This is the price you pay for inaccurate information pushed into a marketing channel. You have to deal with it yourself when you change your own tune later on.
We have been talking about application acceleration, and heterogenous computing for quite a while now. Call it HPC and you scare off anyone who might otherwise be interested in helping to build the future of computing. It really doesn’t matter what you call it at the end of the day. It is coming. Fast.
Fine. Lets call it Accelerated Computing (AC for short). I have a reason for this.
Today at HPCwire. They have a quote on the Tokyo Tech machine. “Our team here at Tokyo Tech worked very hard and closely with ClearSpeed to achieve an increase of over 9 TFLOPS performance from our previous result with very little addition in power requirements and no overhead in space,” said Professor Satoshi Matsuoka of … Read moreWhen one paragraph says it all
My time is a zero sum game. My day job kicked into serious overdrive in the last few weeks, and I simply haven’t had cycles to surface. Will try to force this over the weekend. Lots to write about. Like the accelerator market going into warp drive (pun intended), a really interesting BAA from the … Read moreapologies for the recent infrequent posting