3 ms·
It is definitely not incremental. If you watch some talk on Gordon Bell prize for Frontier, you see that the dynamics have changed completely. Data, software s
by trueismywork 2y ago
It is definitely not incremental. If you watch some talk on Gordon Bell prize for Frontier, you see that the dynamics have changed completely.
Data, software stack, I/O have suddenly become bottlenecks in multiple places. So yes, it is a watershed moment..
- dghlsakjg 2y agoCan you explain how 10^18 FLOPS is fundamentally different than (10^18 - 20) FLOPS? Do the conventional rules of computing completely change at that exact number?
- trueismywork 2y agohttps://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1902810 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1902810 See this for example. Different applications have different scales at which they reach similar problems. Exascale is decent upper bound for most of the fields. If you really dig in deep, the bound may be found at slightly lower value > 500 Pflops. But it's a good rule of thumb to consider 1 EFlop/s to be safe. Also see this https://irp.fas.org/agency/dod/jason/exascale.pdf https://irp.fas.org/agency/dod/jason/exascale.pdf
- dekhn 2y agoBut that same point was made at every 3 levels of magnitude improvement in supercomputing history.
- trueismywork 2y agoFor example, In situ visualization is now preferred due I/O bottleneck in application instead of compute bottleneck. This seems different from last generations.