The second most powerful computer on Earth is a Mac!
- Thread starter hulkaros
- Start date
This is what I would use it for.
128 tracks of digital audio at 96k 24bit,
with multiple protools plugins running on them while at the same time running a full movie length 3-4 gig quicktime all sync'd with smpte in Digital Performer 4 with Mach 5 controlling several terabytes of sample libray, and simutaneously recording both new audio and midi sequences.
We do this now (minus the mach 5) at 48k 24bit on 32 tracks using a dual 1.25 g4 running 9. feh
128 tracks of digital audio at 96k 24bit,
with multiple protools plugins running on them while at the same time running a full movie length 3-4 gig quicktime all sync'd with smpte in Digital Performer 4 with Mach 5 controlling several terabytes of sample libray, and simutaneously recording both new audio and midi sequences.
We do this now (minus the mach 5) at 48k 24bit on 32 tracks using a dual 1.25 g4 running 9. feh
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
And what would you do with the other 1099 G5's? 
I'm not sure what I'd do with all those CPU cycles... Use a couple for heavy-duty rendering of various things, use several hundred for something like Folding@Home, use one for gaming... hmm.
You could record an 1100-piece orchestra with only 1 microphone per computer...
I'm not sure what I'd do with all those CPU cycles... Use a couple for heavy-duty rendering of various things, use several hundred for something like Folding@Home, use one for gaming... hmm.
You could record an 1100-piece orchestra with only 1 microphone per computer...
ocelot
Registered
I've been following "Big Mac" since June when the first rumors of VTech building it came out - I would expect several more "large" orders of PPC970 based machines by organizations in the market for serious processing power - national weather service, various US Govt labs, and universities/governments world wide. I would also expect to see machines using AMD's new 64 bit chomper. It breaks my heart that Intel has no cheap 64 bit solution... breaks my heart... sniff sniff sniff - john.
VT's big mac computer is unofficially 4th place ... but the big mac's numbers might improve significantly ... so it could only get better.
#1- 5120 custom processors, 35.8 trillion calculations/sec, 250 million bucks
#2 - 3072 hp processors, 13.88 trilion calculations/sec, price ?
fastest clustered computer
# 3 fastest - 2304 Xeon processors, 7.63 trillion calculations/sec 10-15 million bucks
#4 - 2200 powerPC, 7.41 trillion calculations/sec, 5.2 millionbucks
that's for now, it might move up by november.
I'm sure there will be much more mac clusters in the very near future.
#1- 5120 custom processors, 35.8 trillion calculations/sec, 250 million bucks
#2 - 3072 hp processors, 13.88 trilion calculations/sec, price ?
fastest clustered computer
# 3 fastest - 2304 Xeon processors, 7.63 trillion calculations/sec 10-15 million bucks
#4 - 2200 powerPC, 7.41 trillion calculations/sec, 5.2 millionbucks
that's for now, it might move up by november.
I'm sure there will be much more mac clusters in the very near future.
17 is the theoretical performance. Real world performance seems much less. It is still the overall best for cost vs performance.
The huge difference has to do with low optimization. They say(VT) will take 2 months to tune the system before using it for research to help improve the speed.
There are a lot of things that could affect the performance, such as bad network design, poor programming and poor disk access.
read more
The huge difference has to do with low optimization. They say(VT) will take 2 months to tune the system before using it for research to help improve the speed.
There are a lot of things that could affect the performance, such as bad network design, poor programming and poor disk access.
read more
tsizKEIK
its all about HOUSE music
http://www.mediaworkers.de/text-align/index.html
the BIG mac is at third place right now.. 9.5 trflops but will certainly gow up...
[/QUOTE]"Ironically, they lost the gigahertz game," he said of Intel. "(The G5) is extremely faster than the Itanium II,
the BIG mac is at third place right now.. 9.5 trflops but will certainly gow up...
[/QUOTE]"Ironically, they lost the gigahertz game," he said of Intel. "(The G5) is extremely faster than the Itanium II,
The cluster was assembled in less than a month by hundreds of student volunteers who were paid only in soda and pizza for their labor. They ate between 600 and 700 pizzas, Varadarajan estimated.
its funny how simple macs can be some time..
cummon... a supercomputer assembled by students who are rewarded with pizza...
its amazin how cheap this supercomputer was (bare in mind there was no special deal... the G5s were bought of the apple store for the same price), and the time it took to built this thing is also amazing. read the article . its good
hulkaros
The Incredible...
"Ironically, they lost the gigahertz game," he said of Intel. "(The G5) is extremely faster than the Itanium II,The cluster was assembled in less than a month by hundreds of student volunteers who were paid only in soda and pizza for their labor. They ate between 600 and 700 pizzas, Varadarajan estimated.tsizKEIK said:
its funny how simple macs can be some time..
cummon... a supercomputer assembled by students who are rewarded with pizza...
its amazin how cheap this supercomputer was (bare in mind there was no special deal... the G5s were bought of the apple store for the same price), and the time it took to built this thing is also amazing. read the article . its good
For THAT many pizzas I would assemble alone for them 2200 Dual G5s!!!
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
Bookem: Quite well, I'm sure.
Tsiz: Actually, they got quite a discount on the systems. The retail cost of each G5, with 4 GB of RAM, is $5350... 1100 of those would be almost $5.9 million, and that doesn't count the cost of the infrastructure, which you can bet added significantly to the cost. And yet they got it for only $5.2 million. I'd say they got quite a good educational discount on the G5's.
Tsiz: Actually, they got quite a discount on the systems. The retail cost of each G5, with 4 GB of RAM, is $5350... 1100 of those would be almost $5.9 million, and that doesn't count the cost of the infrastructure, which you can bet added significantly to the cost. And yet they got it for only $5.2 million. I'd say they got quite a good educational discount on the G5's.
RacerX
Old Rhapsody User
So assuming that the current results are going to stand (the Big Mac has a ways to go to displace the system in second place), this is how the top 25 (plus 1) looks:
Plus it is cool that one of the PowerPC based systems on that list is using the 604e. Sort of makes those older pre-G3 Power Macs look a little better.
1. 5,120 NEC processors @ 500 MHz
2. 8,192 EV-68 processors @ 1.25 GHz
3. 2,200 PowerPC 970 processors @ 2.0 GHz (IBM/Apple)
4. 2,304 Xeon processors @ 2.4 GHz (Intel)
5. 8,192 POWER3 processors @ 375 MHz (IBM)
6. 6,656 POWER3 processors @ 375 MHz (IBM)
7. 1,920 Xeon processors @ 2.4 GHz (Intel)
8. 2,304 HPC2500 processors @ 1.3 GHz
9. 1,540 Itanium 2 processors @ 1.0 GHz (Intel)
10. 3,016 ES-45 processors @ 1.0 GHz
11. 2,560 ES-45 processors @ 1.0 GHz
12. 1,536 Xeon processors @ 2.2 GHZ (Intel)
13. 1,280 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
14. 1,216 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
15. 1,184 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
16. 960 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
17. 960 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
18. 9,632 Intel processors @ ? MHz (Intel)
19. 864 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
20. 1,024 P4 Xeon processors @ 1.8 GHz (Intel)
21. 1,392 ES-45 processors @ 1.0 GHz
22. 5,808 PowerPC 604e processors @ 375 MHz (IBM)
23. 800 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
24. 1,920 POWER3 processors @ 375 MHz (IBM)
25. 768 POWER4 processors @ 1.3 GHz (IBM)
26. 600 P4 Xeon processors @ 1.8 GHz (Intel/Dell)
Plus it is cool that one of the PowerPC based systems on that list is using the 604e. Sort of makes those older pre-G3 Power Macs look a little better.
We'll see in mid-November. c't newsticker - http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/boi-03.11.03-002/ - today released a newsbit about this as well. BigMac has reached 10.28 TFlops according to them. Still ways to go number 2, but number 3 seems to be a safe bet right now.
And yes: The most important number about BigMac is, of course, the price. I hope Apple will tout this as soon as the numbers are out.
c't newsticker - http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/boi-03.11.03-002/ - today released a newsbit about this as well. BigMac has reached 10.28 TFlops according to them. Still ways to go number 2, but number 3 seems to be a safe bet right now.And yes: The most important number about BigMac is, of course, the price. I hope Apple will tout this as soon as the numbers are out.
Xserves would of course make it easier to stack them into racks. Less space used, too, I guess... But I'm wondering, too, if this will lead to big people thinking differently about supercomputing. Will this lead to less Power4/Power5 sales...? And what will IBM do, then?
