£52 Million Govt Funding for New UK Supercomputer 135
Lancey writes "The BBC reports that the UK government has contributed £52 million towards the building of the High-End Computing Terascale Resource to replace two existing supercomputers currently in use by British scientists. The story claims a maximum speed of 100 teraflops, although it is unlikely that the machine will ever be pushed to this limit. Some of the government funding will also be used to train scientists and programmers to develop software capable of exploiting the machine's potential."
Born Yesterday? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, it is unlikely to ever be pushed to its limits
Give it a little while. Ten years ago, people thought 16MB of RAM was excessive. Ten years before that, 512KB was considered a luxury.--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Insightful)
to actually make any chance of beeting a 12 year old in the game of Go
Roel
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Funny)
Then there's those Japanese kids possessed by ghosts of ancient, suicidal Go masters. Hoo boy.
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:1)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:1)
(Warning: inside joke)
Roel
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Informative)
Iain.
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2)
When did $52 million become expensive for a government project? Seriously. I am not a mathemetician, but I did pretty well in math classes, but it took me a minute or two to figure out what the US debt was when I saw it. I know that our friends in the UK are not as fiscally irresponsible, but it seems that when people are spending others money, they don't worry much about where it goes... Thats ia a politician-esque trait...
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:1)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2)
Most laptops, if boxed today and shipped to "super computing" sites 10 years ago would have had much better performance than those rooms of machines that they had. Not to mention the power/cooling etc.
Read the article? (Score:1)
It's not going to be pushed to its top limits because it can't handle it for more than a few seconds, has nothing to do with its load.
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2)
Finding and creating the kinds of algorithms where this system works at it's best continues to be half the
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:2)
Those numbers only apply to a gamer's laptop.
14 years ago I admined a deskside RS-6000 box with 380MB of ram (( although the first response I often got when telling people how much ram it had was "Oooh! That's a lot of disk space isn't it?" ))
Almost 25 years ago, the Computer Science building at the University of Alberta had at least two machines with at least 16MB of ram in them -- one was
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:1)
Yes, but how many people are using old machines, pushing them to the limits?
I read the sentence as referring specifically to this machine. Sure, eventually there'll be greater demand for power, but it won't be done on that particular machine (and indeed, as others pointed out, the reason why is explained if you read the whole sentence).
Re:Born Yesterday? (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft wouldn't provide certification. Something about the graphics card not being up to spec....
Thinking ahead. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thinking ahead. (Score:2)
Re:Thinking ahead. (Score:1)
ObPedantic (Score:2)
Re:ObPedantic (Score:1)
i'll just close the door on my way then..
Re:ObPedantic (Score:1)
Required Microsoft Reference... (Score:2)
Re:Required Microsoft Reference... (Score:1)
100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone remember the days when the word 'supercomputer' actually meant something?
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:1)
no really, i did have a point. it's still a big brain,it's just this is more of a hive mind
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:2)
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:2)
AFAICT, I think it effectively meant "whacking great multiprocessor computer with very fast connection between processors".
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:2)
A rack of 100,000 ordinary boxes does not equal 100,000 faster. The problem is always keeping the CPU's busy. There's also the problem of the granularity of the calculation being performed, which is certainly related.
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:1)
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:2)
Don't DC and Marvel have a trademark on that, or something?
Another meaning ... ? (Score:1)
I'm not sure that I can figure out exactly what else it could actually mean (besides trivial differences).
I'm very willing that I'm just ignorant of something here, but is there some kind of special way that devices have to be connected that make them more like a computer? If I connect two computers together, so that they accomplish one (computational) task, are they not one unit computing the answer... one computer? If not, how is it more ... unitary(?) for me to connect (basically by "wire") a bunch m
Re:Another meaning ... ? (Score:2)
Re:Another meaning ... ? (Score:1)
Re:Another meaning ... ? (Score:2)
That may be a fine definition for philosophers, but not for ordinary speech, or even for speech by technical users of computers. For example, if the head of systems in our company said to a sysadmin "please install a computer for this new developer, the fastest thing we have" he'd be pretty unhappy if he swung by later and found a rack of a thousand machines stuffed in there. On the other hand, for philosophical discourse that would be a reasonable int
No ... the objection *didn't like* common speech (Score:1)
Re:No ... the objection *didn't like* common speec (Score:2)
All right ... (Score:1)
First, before I transferred to get my degree in philosophy, I had 7 semesters of training with a double major in physics and math (with an strong elective emphasis on computer science). I've worked in tech fields for almost a decade -- primarily as a programmer. I surely qualify as "a technical person who works with computers."
But let it be that "philosophy" is generally absurd or whatever else. Still no one has said what "a computer" "actually" means. All that's happened is that
Too much philosophy ... (Score:1)
Come to think of it ... I have noticed that my philisophical considerations do increase my general difficulty in interacting with the world at large ... =)
Nonetheless, the above post makes the correct distinction. Were I to disregard considerations of personhood, I would be fine regarding two people intertwined with respect to their functions as a single thing with respect to it as "mechanism of task completion" though not with respect to it as "person".
Certainly we do do this when we refer, for exampl
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:4, Informative)
Of course it's 100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer. It's a rack of 100,000 ordinary computers.
Anyone remember the days when the word 'supercomputer' actually meant something?
Yes! and good riddens.
Do you remember having to re-code for every single machine? Because they were such specialized machines, they tended to be extremely fickle: one wrong operation and performance would go down the drain.
In practice, most computational work in the end consists of running many jobs independently. There are rare occasions where a single super fast CPU might be better but it's even rarer for the performance gains to outweigh the incredible cost increases for buying specialized supercomputer hardware.
Whether it's wise to spend so much money on a single enormous cluster is another issue. You could buy many many individual clusters for individual groups and have them operational in a matter of weeks, rather than having wait till 2008. Besides, the thing is going to be obsolete by 2010.
Re:100,000 times faster than an ordinary computer (Score:2)
Nonetheless, it irks me that people use 'supercomputer' to mean cluster. It irks me even more that one of our competitors uses a network of a few thousand CPUs and claims that as a supercomputer, getting it listed in the top 100 list (or was it top 400, can't reme
It'll be obsolete by the time the software is writ (Score:2)
Lancey: Some of the government funding will also be used to train scientists and programmers to develop software capable of exploiting the machine's potential.
san: Yes! and good riddens. Do you remember having to re-code for every single machine? Because they were such specialized machines, they tended to be extremely fickle: one wrong operation and performance would go down the drain.
If this architecture of theirs is at all novel, and if this is a one-time build of a machine with that architecture [
I know who could (Score:2, Funny)
Tony Montana could, if he had a montague.
Re:I know who could (Score:2)
But is safety guaranteed?
And do we get paid afterwards?
(sorry I'm having a wonderful time with an inside joke)
a montague? (Score:2)
Tony Blair a BOINC freak? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tony Blair a BOINC freak? (Score:1, Troll)
If he was aware of SETI@home he would be there. Never has a narcisist been truer to their affliction than Mr bliar!
Yes, but how does it prevent terrorism or help him lock people up?
Donations Needed (Score:3, Interesting)
"£52 Million Govt Funding for New UK Supercomputer, Donations Needed to Help Find and Train People to Operate It"
Re:Donations Needed (Score:1)
Who's building it? (Score:1)
Re:Who's building it? (Score:1)
I know one of the panel involved in the planning of HECTOR so I might have to ask next time I see him.....
Let's just get this out of the way, shall we? (Score:4, Funny)
640K Should Be Enough for Anybody! (Score:3, Funny)
Like I said class: If you can't fit your program in 640k of memory, you don't know how to program... "640k should be enough for anybody"
Re:640K Should Be Enough for Anybody! (Score:2)
From my knowledge of UK government IT history . . (Score:4, Insightful)
If you think I am being too cynical, just look at their track record. The CSA computer system, the air traffic control system, etc
What amazes me is that they still get more work. Surely even New Labour have a limit to how far a bribe can take them.
Re:From my knowledge of UK government IT history . (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:From my knowledge of UK government IT history . (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:From my knowledge of UK government IT history . (Score:2)
Re:From my knowledge of UK government IT history . (Score:2)
Re:From my knowledge of UK government IT history . (Score:2)
Fortunately the fact that it is public money doesn't mean the government run it. The UK research community have a proven track record on running big iron; it's really no different to US.gov giving money to LLNL to run Blue Gene/L.
Reminds me of the Punch comment on 1984 (Score:2)
Don't blame the politicians: I believe Mr, Blair still has to get his wife to type his emails. He wouldn't know a supercomputer from a Gameboy. Blame the Civil Service, who make damned sure that no scientists or engineers ever reach the top level and show up the incompetence of the Oxford Greats graduates y
Re:Reminds me of the Punch comment on 1984 (Score:1)
Offtopic/rss/link/bug (Score:2)
So is 100 teraflops a record or what? (Score:1)
Also, I am curious how some of the folks here on slashdot would answer the question: If 100 teraflops can be achieved and sustained, what are the three best single uses to apply that much processing power against?
Personaly, I have no idea. As for Vista, I believe that joke has already been made once or twice in the discussion.
Re:So is 100 teraflops a record or what? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So is 100 teraflops a record or what? (Score:2)
Re:So is 100 teraflops a record or what? (Score:2, Funny)
Hosting the world's prOn needs.
Thank you and good nite.
Re:So is 100 teraflops a record or what? (Score:1)
The diffuculty is considering things like: is the distribution of heat energy across a bowl of hot grits predictable regarding the size of the bowl, the volume of grits, and maybe even a
Connection? (Score:4, Interesting)
No nuclear testing means all proving of a new warhead design have to be done computationally. Now a new machine is being bought...
Re:Connection? (Score:1)
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
AFAIK, the warheads are designed and built in the UK, I believe at the AWE plant at Aldermaston.
It's the rockets we buy from the US, and the submarines that they're loaded onto.
That's great but . . . (Score:4, Funny)
Famous last words.. (Score:1)
Pfft.. lets see them try to run web2.0 on that..
The picture in the article looks exactly like ... (Score:2)
Is it a Blue Gene (just a stock picture so that the average reader will get the idea that this is something BIG), or is this actually Hector?
Re:The picture in the article looks exactly like . (Score:1)
PS3s (Score:1)
submitted a story a few days ago.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Cray to build 24,000 quad-core Opteron Petacomp!!
Friday March 31, @07:03AM Rejected
check it out here..
Re:Wrong-o Laddie (Score:2)
Although you'd need to allow power usage by any cluster terminals, routers, external storage etc... but with 166MW of the stated 170MW I think you could fit that in.
Quit Whining (Score:1)
Excellent (Score:2)
have they figured out how to make it leak oil ? (Score:1)
Re:have they figured out how to make it leak oil ? (Score:2)
Besides, British cars are some of the best in the world and i'd stand by that.. TVR, Jaguar, Aston Martin, Land Rover, Marcos, Morgan, MG, Ariel.. we can make some pretty good cars when we put our minds to it!
Re:have they figured out how to make it leak oil ? (Score:2)
What about using it for discrete calculations? (Score:1)
Re:What about using it for discrete calculations? (Score:1)
Dumb phrases circa 2026 (Score:2)
100 Teraflops ought to be enough for anybody.
Who needs a supercomputer? (Score:1)
Re:Who needs a supercomputer? (Score:2)
hmmmm (Score:1)
Bin-dun? (Score:1)
Imagine the power of every uni-desktop all running together in parralle! Plus you get constant free upgrades. The solution would need it's own c++/java esk language for the tasks to be written in, s
Hactar... (Score:1)
Conspiracy Theory (Score:1)
Remember?: "If 256-bit triple-DES or similar techniques are used then decryption could require supercomputer-levels of cracking."
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/04/13 48200&tid=123 [slashdot.org]
Gaming (Score:1)