Posted on 06/23/2004 12:17:13 AM PDT by Swordmaker
A U.S. Army contractor has purchased a $5.8 million, 1,566-server supercomputer from Apple Computer, a real-world cousin to an academic system that briefly appeared high on a list of the most powerful machines.
In November, a machine called System X with 1,100 dual-processor Power Mac G5 workstations climbed to third place on the Top500 list of the most powerful supercomputers. On Monday, Huntsville, Ala.-based Colsa announced it's buying a larger system called MACH 5 to run Army simulations of the aerodynamics of flight much faster than the speed of sound.
System X, which vanished from the most recent list for upgrades, had sustained performance of 10.3 trillion calculations per second, or "teraflops." The Colsa system, made of dual-processor Xserve G5 machines, is expected to reach about 15 teraflops when it's up and running this fall, said project manager Mike Whitlock.
By comparison, the fastest system on a new version of the Top500 list, NEC's Earth Simulator, runs at a speed of 35.8 teraflops, and only one other system exceeded 15 teraflops.
Hewlett-Packard and IBM dominate the market for high-performance technical computing, with sales of $1.79 billion and $1.62 billion, respectively, in 2003, according to researcher IDC. But Apple is angling for its own share. It has released management software to control large groups of servers, and it sells models geared for supercomputing cluster use with unneeded components stripped out.
Much of the credit to Apple's successes thus far is due to the processor it uses--IBM's PowerPC 970--Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff said.
"The Macintosh software and the nice management features of OS X are factors here, but certainly performance of the processor is an enormous factor," Haff said. "PowerPC is a fast processor."
Indeed, the chip's abilities to perform a type of mathematical calculation called "floating-point operations" were compelling. "The floating-point units in that processor were particularly attractive," Whitlock said.
Colsa will use Mac OS X as the primary operating system, though it will evaluate other options including Red Hat Linux and Yellow Dog Linux, Whitlock added.
MACH 5, which stands for Multiple Advanced Computers for Hypersonic, G5, will occupy 42 racks and 600 square feet of floor space, said Anthony DiRienzo, a Colsa executive vice president. Apple was the winning bidder among six companies, DiRienzo said, declining to name the competitors.
One difference between MACH 5 and System X is the networking system that connects the individual servers. Where System X used the high-speed InfiniBand technology, MACH 5 will use the more conventional 1 gigabit-per-second Ethernet, DiRienzo said.
The fluid dynamics simulations Colsa will run require more processor power than top networking speed, he said.
System X's successor at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University is expected to be running in time to produce a score for the coming November version of the Top500 list, said Alex Grossman, director of server and storage hardware at Apple. The upgraded Virginia Tech system is being built using Xserve G5 machines.
Mac Ping - New supercomputer news.
AS always if you want to be included on the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
If for some strange reason you want off... do the same.
And Apple is touting this as big news....why?
No flaming needed, I have nothing against Apples or their users. It just seems that the only thing that makes this an Apple is its use of the Apple OS.
Obviously no one ever informed you "market share" is THE standard in comparative evaluation for computing platforms.
Get back to us when they find a good virus that will run on a Mac...
... roughly analogous to "high speed" being the only thing that makes a car "fast."
You want they should have Keebler elves built'em?
I'm not sure I'd trust "Yellow Dog Linux."
Uh,
Apple box
Apple Mother Board
Apple Operating System
Apple utlitility software for clusters
Apple Design
I suppose that when the third most powerful computer network in the world, surpassed only by two multi-multi-million dollar purpose-built machines, is built up of your off-the-shelf machines, that is somewhat newsworthy. Or it seems so to me.
It just seems that the only thing that makes this an Apple is its use of the Apple OS.
I just don't know what to make of this statement.
What makes any computer the computer it is?
First, the processor. This one uses the G5 chip made by IBM. So what? It is fast and reliable. Could Apple build their computer around a different processor? Sure, but so what? I don't get your point.
Second, the rest of the hardware. This also helps define what makes a Mac, but generally it is off the shelf stuff from various OEM hard drive, memory, DVD-R drive manufacturers and so on. So what? Again, I don't get your point.
Third, we have the operating system. In this case it is OSX 10.3 probably. You say that this is the only thing that makes it an Apple. That's not entirely true, but it is true that the Mac OS is the crown jewel of the Apple, as it is far and away the most stable, fast, easy and versatile OS out there.
But even if the machine is running Linux or UNIX or some other operating system, it will still be a hard working, beautifully made, reliable Mac.
And I still don't quite get your point.
"First, the processor. This one uses the G5 chip made by IBM. So what? It is fast and reliable. Could Apple build their computer around a different processor? Sure, but so what? I don't get your point."
"And I still don't quite get your point."
You're a MAC user...aren't ya?
Relax, my post was not a slam on MAC's. They are fine computers and do well what they do. My point was simply that is an article extolling the wonders of this fine 'MAC' computer system, and at its heart is an IBM processor. Also, many other computers named in the article look like they are faster, better units.
Hey...I'm not a geek, my computer knowledge is relatively basic. To me they are tools to be used. I don't care how/why they work, just that they do what I want done. I get mine custom built by a local shop out of name brand parts and built to my spec's.
So please, don't get offended by my post.
Please see my post to John Valentine.
Apple was a partner in the original PowerPC collective with IBM and Motorola and was therefore part designer of the architecture. Apple is also a partner in the Hypertransport consortium that designed the bus architecture, and it designed the motherboard. It also designed the 1U rack unit to be easily manageable and manage heat more efficiently so you can stack a full 42 in a rack without worrying about heat problems.
So why should I, a Mac user, be concerned that a Mac supercomputer will eventually become the fastest computer in the world? I make my living fixing problems on PC's - problems that just don't exist on Macs. If Macs should ever achieve more than 10% market share, many PC consultants will lose significant business, while many others will go out of business. I want Apple to continue to be successful, so I can have a stable platform for my own personal use, but that doesn't mean that I want to see my own business put at risk, when many other people start using it, too.
In other words, do as I say, not as I do. Use a PC. I need the work.
This is probably more power than I need for my e-mail and Freeping.
Actually this article does not mention the XGrid software that Apple ships which makes it much easier to parallelize programs, thus allowing you to actually take advantage of the hardware's performance.
add me to your ping list. I've had a few macs since I bought my first 128 Kbyte machine in 1984. (I still keep the mother board on my garage wall.)
I'd buy a Mac, but I'm not gay.
Macs suck.
I cannot stand Mac computers... I've had terrible experiences with iMacs. Give me a windows PC any day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.