Fastest-ever Windows HPC cluster nets 68.5 teraflops
In the grand scheme of supercomputers, a homegrown cluster constructed by Microsoft is just a boy among men. However, said rig has set at least one record by becoming the "fastest-ever Windows HPC cluster." At the International Supercomputing conference in Dresden, Germany, it was announced that this beast ranked 23rd in the world "with a problem-solving performance of 68.5 teraflops." The National Center for Supercomputing Applications utilized a beta version of Windows HPC Server 2008 to hit the aforesaid mark, and if you're curious as to what it took to get there, try 9,472 cores of processing power. There's more where this came from for the hardcore nerds in attendance right in the read link.[Via Slashdot]
Filed under: Desktops
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
kal326 @ Jun 25th 2008 3:29PM
CUDA runs on Windows, why not cluster a bunch of GTX280s or 9800GX2 cards? I think you would get a bit better number with 9,472 GPU cores instead of CPU cores.
Ryan @ Jun 25th 2008 3:42PM
What are you talking about use a bunch of GPU cores? GPU is for graphics and CPU is for memory and processes. Two different things. Plus GPUs just help the CPU by getting some of the graphics power of the CPU. So in otherwords, why on earth would you want that many GPU cores? It also wastes a ton of power and the motherboard would easily shut down due to heat.
Rob @ Jun 25th 2008 3:43PM
sure... let do some math
9472 cores, assuming two socket quad-core processors equates to 1184 servers. If these are regular 1U servers (not blades or twin servers) then that would require 28.2 racks (42U fully populated)
That is a pretty large cluster, but by no means the largest system of its kind.
Now lets look at a GPU solution. Lets assume you can put two of these cards into a 3U rackmount server. That means you need 4736 servers just to house them (assuming one GPU core per card). To house that you will need 338.29 racks alone!
natels @ Jun 25th 2008 3:44PM
To run Crysis..?
I stooped that low eh..
Ryan @ Jun 25th 2008 3:58PM
Dude, I wouldn't want to be in the room to play that game. At least there's no lag. :D
TavisJohn @ Jun 25th 2008 3:59PM
@ Ryan...
http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/29/researchers-create-supercomputer-with-four-geforce-9800-gx2-card/
Look a supe compuer made out of Grafx Cards!
A processor is a processor! It does not matter what their intended use is. All prcessors are designed to crunch numbers.
Richard @ Jun 25th 2008 4:03PM
Rob, let me point you towards these guys
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla_s1070.html
70 of these would beat out your 1184 servers
four Telsa gpus per unit, 280 total gpus 67,200 stream processors
Ryan @ Jun 25th 2008 4:30PM
@TravisJohn
That wasn't my point. The video was to say that you can make an affordable one. Yes, granted you have 8 processors going all at once. You should just get a Mac Pro, because it uses 8 also and costs less, but we don't consider that a supercomputer. Granted it's fast, but it's not a supercomputer.
My point originally was that it consumes more power than a normal cpu unit. Also like stated earlier you would have to have many cabinets chained together to run something that size.
rob @ Jun 25th 2008 3:32PM
Microsoft has literally been trying to buy themselves into the HPC market for the last few years.
I know of several cases where they are giving MS clusters to academic customers, and I am pretty sure this cluster is probably a 'donation' of some sort.
Spyvie @ Jun 25th 2008 4:28PM
The nerve of them, trying to make cluster computing affordable for anyone who needs it. With the gall to try and make a profit in the end.
No wonder everyone hate MS
jordan @ Jun 26th 2008 12:06AM
@Spyvie
Ummm, I don't know if you read the article, but I don't see any mention of how much this cluster cost. The cost of licensing the software from Microsoft was probably ridiculous on its own. Then you have to add the cost of hardware of OVER 1000 servers and their switching/interconnects, etc. Oh yes, POWER consumption.
Most people who want to pursue cluster computing have the money to spend, and much could be saved by NOT using Microsoft's HPC OS.
You need to look at the rest of the list of supercomputers, and you'll soon see that I believe that every other supercomputer on that list uses much less hardware (in terms of CPU cores), which results in a much lower cost. Oh yes, thanks to less hardware, you have lower power consumption, reducing monthly costs further.
This is probably a horrible analogy, but it's like Microsoft bringing 100 small cars and saying they can tow 20 tons total, and everybody else brings a handful of bigger pick-up trucks, and they can tow much more for much less money.
Nick @ Jun 25th 2008 3:32PM
Yeah, what he said.
gimpbully @ Jun 25th 2008 3:32PM
Have you ever seen the MS booth at HPC conferences? They're a joke with people in capes and tophats. Once they start taking the field seriously, maybe people will start taking their OS in this sector seriously... maybe.
ethana2 @ Jun 25th 2008 3:45PM
I find this quite hilarious. This world record is only a followup of 'how much suck can you cram into an OS?'
Rob @ Jun 25th 2008 3:56PM
I have unfortunately. I was even requested by my employer to help answer questions from customers at the MS booth a few years back. But after I showed up with a Linux shirt they send one of the sales guys.
It is funny that this shows up now, since this system has been on the top500 list since June 2007 and was originally on the 8th spot (http://top500.org/system/8757).
What is also funny is the computer description "PowerEdge 1955, 2.33 GHz, Infiniband, Windows Server 2008/Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4"
As you can see Windows is not he only OS!!
stan @ Jun 25th 2008 4:00PM
But does it blend??
lawyer bird @ Jun 25th 2008 4:32PM
yes it blends. its the best damn blender the world has ever seen, obvisously
Ben @ Jun 25th 2008 4:04PM
Pitiful....
The current #1 is over 100 times more powerful and uses 30% less processor cores. I wouldn't be bragging until their performance to hardware ratio comes more inline with the rest of the contenders.
Casper42 @ Jun 25th 2008 7:27PM
#1 is RoadRunner from IBM
http://top500.org/system/9485
This is made up of 6,562 Dual Core AMD Chips (so 13,124 Cores)
AND
12,240 Cell chips (Similar to the PS3 Processor)
So thats like 25,000 Cores total.
# 23 is Abe which is the one mentioned in this article and is said to have 1200 Servers, each is Dual Proc and each Proc is Quad Core. That is 9,600 Cores total.
http://top500.org/system/details/8757
Next time do some research before you open your mouth.
KilgoreTrout @ Jun 25th 2008 4:13PM
Filling a niche that will never exist
Casper42 @ Jun 25th 2008 7:34PM
Another wonderfully informed human being.
Is this Niche supercomputing or Windows based supercomputing?
I worked at a company that had a small HPC Cluster and we used it for protein folding type stuff, similar to folding@home. I know most of our direct competitors had similar systems.
HPC clusters are widely used in big business.
Windows based HPC may not be a big thing today, but thats kind of the point right? MS is trying to convince people to give it as try. Once it catches on and get some backing, I'm sure you will see it gets more and more support.
So what niche are we talking about then?
KilgoreTrout @ Jun 25th 2008 8:45PM
@caspar42
Indipendently from the kind of crap that your firm choose to use (for all sorts of different and imponderable reasons) the better alternatives that are and have been out there on the market since a long time are too many to be listed here.
I've got nothing against ignorance per se, but when it gets mixed with arrogance then the cocktail becomes just unbearable (not to mention dangerous too)
A @ Jun 25th 2008 5:04PM
Actually the cluster just ran Windows for the benchmark. It's a linux cluster.
Adrenaline @ Jun 25th 2008 6:06PM
Will it play Dig Dug?
Bert Lagaisse @ Jun 25th 2008 8:11PM
How many serial keys for windows do you need to enter during installation ? ;-) Hopefully not one for each node ;-)
KilgoreTrout @ Jun 25th 2008 8:27PM
@ Casper42
Indipendently from the crap that you firm choose to use (for all sorts different and imponderable reasons) the more practical and generally better alternatives that are and have been out there on the market since a long time, are too many to be listed here.
I have got nothing against ignorance per se, but when mixed with arrogance the resulting cocktail becomes unbearable (and dangerous too)
Sal @ Jun 25th 2008 9:57PM
Dig Dug? Will it play Zork? Or King's Quest?
rez410 @ Jun 25th 2008 10:21PM
Also runs redhat???
http://www.top500.org/system/8757
ShadowKain @ Jun 25th 2008 10:30PM
*Roadrunner Supercomputer is not impressed* ....
I wonder why they set out to do this, if not to come close to the top ten?
I miss Bill Gates being CEO