4 ms·

Clearly your intent is to be argumentative - but i'll bite: They didn’t “go with nvidia”. Your ignorance is exactly why such a statement by the author is detri

Clearly your intent is to be argumentative - but i'll bite: They didn’t “go with nvidia”. Your ignorance is exactly why such a statement by the author is detrimental to the work done. The uninformed end up spreading misinformation. The raw compute (the "booster") is only one part of the system. The rest - the cluster modules - are European-designed, including not just the SiPearl Rhea CPU (SiPearl, France), but also the system architecture and software stack (Jülich Supercomputing Centre, Germany), the interconnect (ParTec, Germany), and the cooling systems (Atos/Eviden, France). These cluster modules are integrated into the BullSequana XH3000 platform (Atos/Eviden, France). Fabrication is outsourced to TSMC (Taiwan), but the design remains fully European. The fact is that the mission statement is to remain globally competitive in terms of computing power, and that means getting exascale as soon as possible. They aren’t going to wait for homegrown compute chips even if they were months away (which i doubt they will be). By your logic all American supercomputers “went with Inria (France)”, because America is “starting from scratch” at writing software.. that they have software developers and chose to use European software is embarrassing.. see how stupid and ignorant such a statement is?

supermatt 1y ago
Looking back again on the article, I can see why you are confused. The author has outright fabricated this whole idea of chip sovereignty being a part of Jupiter. I have no idea where he (and therefore you) got this idea from, but its simply not true - and further points to him just making some excuse to euro-bash. It seems to be a sign of the times under the mad king’s reign. When facts don’t support the narrative, they get reshaped to suit the mood. This kind of editorialising, where political sentiment is passed off as technical insight, doesn’t just weaken the argument, it undermines trust in serious discourse. FYI, the selection criteria only allocated 100 points of a total of 1100 (of which a minimum of 50 were required) to "Contribution to the objectives of the EuroHPC Joint Undertaking" (https://eurohpc-ju.europa.eu/about/discover-eurohpc-ju_en#mission https://eurohpc-ju.europa.eu/about/discover-eurohpc-ju_en#mi...). i.e. Sovereignty was not a key objective. This is all public knowledge that you can easily find for yourself. EDIT - link to the procurement doc: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/tender-details/docs/etender/13127/13127_151622_EN-EN_EuroHPC_Descriptive_document_EXA_ENG_V1.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/port...

supermatt 1y ago

Looking back again on the article, I can see why you are confused. The author has outright fabricated this whole idea of chip sovereignty being a part of Jupiter. I have no idea where he (and therefore you) got this idea from, but its simply not true - and further points to him just making some excuse to euro-bash. It seems to be a sign of the times under the mad king’s reign. When facts don’t support the narrative, they get reshaped to suit the mood. This kind of editorialising, where political sentiment is passed off as technical insight, doesn’t just weaken the argument, it undermines trust in serious discourse. FYI, the selection criteria only allocated 100 points of a total of 1100 (of which a minimum of 50 were required) to "Contribution to the objectives of the EuroHPC Joint Undertaking" (https://eurohpc-ju.europa.eu/about/discover-eurohpc-ju_en#mission https://eurohpc-ju.europa.eu/about/discover-eurohpc-ju_en#mi...). i.e. Sovereignty was not a key objective. This is all public knowledge that you can easily find for yourself. EDIT - link to the procurement doc: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/tender-details/docs/etender/13127/13127_151622_EN-EN_EuroHPC_Descriptive_document_EXA_ENG_V1.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/port...