Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

chipsandcheese.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 90 posts

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#31

Post by ls612 »

brianolson wrote: post #7

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess? my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

Why would the scientific computing people want to tip their hand? It’s an open secret that the main point of these mammoth FP64 compute machines is to simulate nuclear weapons detonations to comply with the CTBT you’d think that crowd would really not be fans of broadcasting their capabilities.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#32

Post by chrisss395 »

I haven't kept up with the latest on supercomputing power, but I recall some years ago there being strong evidence that China had a couple of un-announced supercomputers that would have topped the charts. It makes me wonder what is publicly disclosed vs. actual.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#33

Post by amelius »

b33f wrote: post #30

Why are they not using GPUs? is it use cases that don't suit GPUs or because of the limitations they are imposing on themselves to use SMIC domestic chips?

GPUs are for graphics (the G in GPU). These systems are used for more general computations.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#34

Post by kube-system »

ls612 wrote: post #31
brianolson wrote: post #7

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess? my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

Why would the scientific computing people want to tip their hand? It’s an open secret that the main point of these mammoth FP64 compute machines is to simulate nuclear weapons detonations to comply with the CTBT you’d think that crowd would really not be fans of broadcasting their capabilities.

In adversarial scenarios, there are varying strategies in communicating one's capabilities, just as one might do in a poker game.

Sometimes you want to show off what you can do to dissuade others from fucking with you. Sometimes you want to undersell your capabilities to hide your true ability. Sometimes you want others to think you are underselling your capabilities when you are actually at a disadvantage.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#35

Post by galaxy_quest »

amelius wrote: post #33
b33f wrote: post #30

Why are they not using GPUs? is it use cases that don't suit GPUs or because of the limitations they are imposing on themselves to use SMIC domestic chips?

GPUs are for graphics (the G in GPU). These systems are used for more general computations.

I’m not sure if I’m missing a joke, but that’s why we have general purpose computing on graphics processing units (GPGPU) which is why 8/10 of the top 10 machines have GPUs.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#37

Post by Onavo »

ls612 wrote: post #31
brianolson wrote: post #7

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess? my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

Why would the scientific computing people want to tip their hand? It’s an open secret that the main point of these mammoth FP64 compute machines is to simulate nuclear weapons detonations to comply with the CTBT you’d think that crowd would really not be fans of broadcasting their capabilities.

At some point, you will get diminishing returns no? I don't think compute is the bottleneck right now for mechanical engineering if you don't count AI.

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#38

Post by dopa42365 »

ls612 wrote: post #31
brianolson wrote: post #7

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess? my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

Why would the scientific computing people want to tip their hand? It’s an open secret that the main point of these mammoth FP64 compute machines is to simulate nuclear weapons detonations to comply with the CTBT you’d think that crowd would really not be fans of broadcasting their capabilities.

What for? You only need to match the performance that existed in the 1950s. In the Soviet Union. Everything else is a lack of knowledge rather than computing power.

Also you should read the second sentence of the CTBT Wikipedia article to find out why it's not even in force (spoiler: US hasn't ratified it).

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#39

Post by JumpCrisscross »

brianolson wrote: post #7

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess? my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

Is there international value to these designations? As in, would it be worth it for the U.S. to pay a bonus to anyone who qualifies into the TOP500, to offset the cost of the run?

Re: TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

#40

Post by antonvs »

amelius wrote: post #33
b33f wrote: post #30

Why are they not using GPUs? is it use cases that don't suit GPUs or because of the limitations they are imposing on themselves to use SMIC domestic chips?

GPUs are for graphics (the G in GPU). These systems are used for more general computations.

GPUs were for graphics. Now, they're mainly used for machine learning training and inference. The big tech companies are spending eye-watering amounts for GPUs - hundreds of billions of dollars a year each. That's the reason that Nvidia's market cap is at $4.66 trillion.
Post reply on HN