3 ms·
Depends how much of the "supercomputer" the calculation used. If it reserved a single CPU core on a single node, then that'd be cheap, allowing the rest of the
by mnw21cam 6y ago
Depends how much of the "supercomputer" the calculation used. If it reserved a single CPU core on a single node, then that'd be cheap, allowing the rest of the system to get on with something else. There's no reason AWS would be cheaper.
- natechols 6y agoThe supercomputer in this article is extremely specialized hardware design to maximize peak performance across all nodes. Using just a single CPU core to run a bioinformatics study would be like taking an army tank to drop the kids off at soccer practice.
- dekhn 6y agoThe supercomputer nodes cost far more, per node, than AWS machines- 15% or more of the budget was spent on interconnect. SUpercomputers don't partition CPUs like that, because interference causes small performance degradation. Unfortunately, CPU is not perfectly compressible- in particular, the cache is shared by all processes that run on the CPU, so if you run another job on the same node, you will see slower performance due to higher cache replacement (this is measured using Cycles Per Instruction).