The article is misleading in more ways than ignoring what the BG/Qs run and the contentious claim that Linux is "the right match", whatever "supercomputing" mea

The article is misleading in more ways than ignoring what the BG/Qs run and the contentious claim that Linux is "the right match", whatever "supercomputing" means. The term is devalued in this context. Nearly the list is not HPC systems in the sense that they could usefully run quantum chemistry at scale; dismiss the Ethernet ones. The HPL number is acknowledged as bad, even by the standard of single performance numbers. It basically reflects the number and width of the vector units and use of a good BLAS. https://hpgmg.org/ https://hpgmg.org/ seems a better choice if you must have a single HPC benchmark number. (HPCG, touted to replace HPL, depends on how you re-write it, which you must to avoid essentially STREAM results.) It's also worth pointing out that much of the capacity there isn't even on an OS kernel, but is off-loaded, and I wonder what multiple entries for "service provider x" actually are as "systems".