5 ms·

can run operations 30 to 100 times faster than a standard iPhone or tablet “Supercomputers” are now only 30-100 times faster than a mobile phone? Not sure if

can run operations 30 to 100 times faster than a standard iPhone or tablet “Supercomputers” are now only 30-100 times faster than a mobile phone? Not sure if that says more about the “supercomputer” or the phone. This was also amusing: The computer also remained operational even thought it lost its primary upload and download connection to NASA up to eight times a day for periods ranging from 3 seconds to 20 minutes. That kind of independence might prove useful on an eventual moon base or mission to Mars, to work around communications delays back to Earth. As if a computer that continues running when its communication link goes down is an accomplishment?

octorian 8y ago
> can run operations 30 to 100 times faster than a standard iPhone or tablet Probably because "kids these days" don't actually know any computers exist, that aren't mobile phones (or phone OS based tablets). Its a stupid comparison, probably added to make the article catchier.
sp332 8y ago
The iPhone X, which is the fastest phone I can think of, gets around 500-600 gigaflops which would put it just off the Top 500 list in 2004. If we multiply by 30 for 15 Tflop/s, that's the bottom of the Top500 in 2009. Last year the bottom was 400-500 Tflop/s, which is about 1,000 iPhone X's. I mean you don't have to be in the top 500 to be a supercomputer, but I would expect it to be several hundred and not around 30.
- brianwawok 8y ago
  SuperComputer from the Top500 list is a rack if not a room full of many of thousands of pounds of computers. SuperComputer in this case is more akin to a "really powerful desktop" 30x from iPhoneX to really powerful desktop seems reasonable?
  - romwell 8y ago
    >"really powerful desktop" Aka a "computer".
SilasX 8y ago
>As if a computer that continues running when its communication link goes down is an accomplishment? These days? Compared to the typical case? Yes! There was the story of Chrome (IIRC) crashing when it lost internet access. (Yes, it should be unable to access websites, but it shouldn't crash.) JIRA will stutter on text input if its AJAX API calls fail or are too heavy. I've seen developers set up a local mode of an app that somehow sneaks in an internet dependency. Not even going to review Electron. Similar overcoupling in the recent story about Google "no longer supporting login" if you're not running JavaScript. So yeah, it shouldn't merit praise, but a lot of systems fail even at that.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 8y ago
  The saboteur deserves some praise too.
guelo 8y ago
Moore's law is dead, it's been dead for a while. All CPUs are going to continue to converge on the same performance. The only differentiation is the number of cores.
- pitaj 8y ago
  There are many possibilities for further improving efficiency in size and power, including Gallium Arsenide and Carbon nanotubes / graphene.
jschwartzi 8y ago
The other computers on the ISS are things like Zilog Z80s, and Intel 286/386's. The SSD controller chips are more powerful and capable than many of these processors.
- compsciphd 8y ago
  As of 2016, they were using Thinkpad T61p laptops.
  - jschwartzi 8y ago
    That might be true of their personal computers, but the control systems are unlikely to be T61s.
    - compsciphd 8y ago
      this super computer isn't a control system either. it's running computational experiments, much like they might do on their T61s
reaperducer 8y ago
As if a computer that continues running when its communication link goes down is an accomplishment? It shouldn't be, but it seems like it is. My Apple machines, in particular, can't stand a slow net connection. And I'm not talking just about third-party apps. For some reason Macs are good with either huge bandwidth, or zero connectivity. Anywhere in between is problematic. This goes back to at least the 1990's, when Airports had dialup modems in them.

octorian 8y ago

> can run operations 30 to 100 times faster than a standard iPhone or tablet Probably because "kids these days" don't actually know any computers exist, that aren't mobile phones (or phone OS based tablets). Its a stupid comparison, probably added to make the article catchier.

sp332 8y ago

The iPhone X, which is the fastest phone I can think of, gets around 500-600 gigaflops which would put it just off the Top 500 list in 2004. If we multiply by 30 for 15 Tflop/s, that's the bottom of the Top500 in 2009. Last year the bottom was 400-500 Tflop/s, which is about 1,000 iPhone X's. I mean you don't have to be in the top 500 to be a supercomputer, but I would expect it to be several hundred and not around 30.

brianwawok 8y ago
SuperComputer from the Top500 list is a rack if not a room full of many of thousands of pounds of computers. SuperComputer in this case is more akin to a "really powerful desktop" 30x from iPhoneX to really powerful desktop seems reasonable?
- romwell 8y ago
  >"really powerful desktop" Aka a "computer".

SilasX 8y ago

>As if a computer that continues running when its communication link goes down is an accomplishment? These days? Compared to the typical case? Yes! There was the story of Chrome (IIRC) crashing when it lost internet access. (Yes, it should be unable to access websites, but it shouldn't crash.) JIRA will stutter on text input if its AJAX API calls fail or are too heavy. I've seen developers set up a local mode of an app that somehow sneaks in an internet dependency. Not even going to review Electron. Similar overcoupling in the recent story about Google "no longer supporting login" if you're not running JavaScript. So yeah, it shouldn't merit praise, but a lot of systems fail even at that.

0xdeadbeefbabe 8y ago
The saboteur deserves some praise too.

guelo 8y ago

Moore's law is dead, it's been dead for a while. All CPUs are going to continue to converge on the same performance. The only differentiation is the number of cores.

pitaj 8y ago
There are many possibilities for further improving efficiency in size and power, including Gallium Arsenide and Carbon nanotubes / graphene.

jschwartzi 8y ago

The other computers on the ISS are things like Zilog Z80s, and Intel 286/386's. The SSD controller chips are more powerful and capable than many of these processors.

compsciphd 8y ago
As of 2016, they were using Thinkpad T61p laptops.
- jschwartzi 8y ago
  That might be true of their personal computers, but the control systems are unlikely to be T61s.
  - compsciphd 8y ago
    this super computer isn't a control system either. it's running computational experiments, much like they might do on their T61s

reaperducer 8y ago

As if a computer that continues running when its communication link goes down is an accomplishment? It shouldn't be, but it seems like it is. My Apple machines, in particular, can't stand a slow net connection. And I'm not talking just about third-party apps. For some reason Macs are good with either huge bandwidth, or zero connectivity. Anywhere in between is problematic. This goes back to at least the 1990's, when Airports had dialup modems in them.