4 ms·
> You need to be in a certain software bubble... Or have a fundamental understanding of the way mainframes have been built since forever... massive job schedul
by sennight 4y ago
> You need to be in a certain software bubble...
Or have a fundamental understanding of the way mainframes have been built since forever... massive job schedulers feeding various ASICs purpose built for different tasks. IBM is really something else when it comes to this sort of thing, the left hand really doesn't know what the right hand is doing over there. Summit at ORNL... a homogeneous supercomputer cluster made of power9 machines effectively acting as pci backplanes for GPGPUs. You'd think they'd know better... the choice for the ISA made sense given the absolute gulf between them and x86 I/O at the time, but to then not take full advantage of their CPUs by going with CUDA... wow. Oh well, this is the same company that fully opened their CPU - and then immediately announce how their next CPU was going to depend on binary blobbed memory controllers... aaand they also sold the IP for the controllers to some scumbag softcore silicon IP outfit. So despite all their talk with regard to open source, no - they don't seem to actually understand how to fully take advantage of it.
- snovv_crash 4y agoMainframes died for a reason, and that reason wasn't the capabilities of their specialized hardware blocks, but a. the difficulty of using them in unintended ways, such as wiring together a bunch of them to get better performance b. the specialized knowledge required to get them to do anything at all c. the limited use cases of the hardware (see a.) which made it expensive Applauding OpenCL because it is more like mainframes than CUDA... seems nonsensical to me.