81–90 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought SoftBank bought them, making them a Japanese company? In any case, SiPearl seems to be the one designing the actual chip, they are French.
Although SoftBank still owns 90% of the equity, they’re now back to being public and since their headquarters is still Cambridge, I’d still call them a UK company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, CPUs are still the main workhorse for many scientific workloads. Sometimes just because the code hasn’t been ported, sometimes because it’s just not something that a GPU can do well.
> just because the code hasn’t been ported, Seems stupid to use millions of dollars of supercomputer time just because you can't be bothered to get a few phd students to spend a few months rewriting in CUDA...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, CPUs are still the main workhorse for many scientific workloads. Sometimes just because the code hasn’t been ported, sometimes because it’s just not something that a GPU can do well.
> just because the code hasn’t been ported, Seems stupid to use millions of dollars of supercomputer time just because you can't be bothered to get a few phd students to spend a few months rewriting in CUDA...
> Seems stupid to use millions of dollars of supercomputer time just because you can't be bothered to get a few phd students to spend a few months rewriting in CUDA...
Rewriting code in CUDA won’t magically make workloads well suited to GPGPU.
>The Jülich Supercomputing Centre, which is near Munich, will host the system. Interesting take on geography . The confusion, pobably has to do with the fact that the German tier 0 Gauss super computing center is actually spread over 3 sites (Jülich near Cologne/Aachen, Stuttgart and Garching near Munich)
Stuttgart and Garching near Munich This reads weird. It took me way too many seconds of wondering "wouldn't Stuttgart be nearer to... Stuttgart?" before I understood what you wrote. Sometimes the Oxford Comma has value, it seems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sometimes the code is deeply complex stuff that has accumulated for over 30 years. to _just_ rewrite it in CUDA can be a massive undertaking that could easily produce subtly incorrect results that end up in papers could propagate far into the future by way of citations etc
All the more reason to rewrite it... You don't want some mistake in 30 year old COBOL code to be making your 2023 experiment to have wrong results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought SoftBank bought them, making them a Japanese company? In any case, SiPearl seems to be the one designing the actual chip, they are French.
>I thought SoftBank bought them, making them a Japanese company? What a weird metric for determining the nationality of a company. Intel are publicly traded: are they stateless?
A bit sad that while POWER9 processors were used in then-SoTA supercomputers, as far as I can tell POWER10 (which I worked on more) is not being used for scientific/industrial HPC.
I understand that POWER9 was much more open than its successor. Is that a factor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand that POWER9 was much more open than its successor. Is that a factor?
No, I think IBM just gave up on HPC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I think IBM just gave up on HPC.
Can confirm; supercomputers don't slot neatly enough into quartly EPS goals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> just because the code hasn’t been ported, Seems stupid to use millions of dollars of supercomputer time just because you can't be bothered to get a few phd students to spend a few months rewriting in CUDA...
>> just because the code hasn’t been ported, sometimes because it’s just not something that a GPU can do well. > Seems stupid to use millions of dollars of supercomputer time just because you can't be bothered to get a few phd students to spend a few months rewriting in CUDA... Rewriting code in CUDA won’t magically make workloads well suited to GPGPU.