24 ms·

I wonder if having one supercomputer with x number of chips or having eight supercomputers each with x/8 number of chips would be the more practical working set

I wonder if having one supercomputer with x number of chips or having eight supercomputers each with x/8 number of chips would be the more practical working setup. Weather forecasting for example is basically a complex probabilistic algorithm, and there's a notion that running eight models in parallel and then comparing and contrasting the results will give better estimates of actual outcomes than running one model on a much more powerful machine. Is it feasible to run eight models on one supercomputer, or is that inefficient?

derac 4y ago
You can run many programs on one supercomputer simultaneously, yes. Check out XSEDE. Cost-wise one big is going to be cheaper than 8 small due to infrastructure issues - cooling, maintenance, space, etc.
- pphysch 4y ago
  "XSEDE" proper is getting EOL'd in a couple months and transitioning to ACCESS [1]. [1] - https://www.hpcwire.com/off-the-wire/nsf-announces-upcoming-transition-from-xsede-to-access/ https://www.hpcwire.com/off-the-wire/nsf-announces-upcoming-...
timbargo 4y ago
You can partition a large compute cluster into many smaller ones. Users can make a request specifying how many processors they want for how long. Check out this link to see the activity of a supercomputer at Argonne. https://status.alcf.anl.gov/theta/activity https://status.alcf.anl.gov/theta/activity And I believe it is more efficient to have a single large cluster. As there are large overheard costs of power, cooling, and having a physical space to put the machine in. Plus a personnel cost to maintain the machines.