|
Search
CRA TumbleLog
Archives
April 2007
March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004
Archives by Category
American Competitiveness Initiative (45)
CRA (38) Computing Community Consortium (CCC) (6) Diversity in Computing (9) Events (8) FY06 Appropriations (13) FY07 Appropriations (32) FY08 Appropriations (8) Funding (135) Misc. (42) People (67) Policy (179) R&D in the Press (56) Research (45) Security (20)
Recent Entries
NY Times on Women's Interest in Computing
Time on GENI Innovation Briefing Event NSF Reauthorization Eugene Spafford Honored with ACM President's Award Innovation Bill Moves Forward CRA's Hiring Innovation Funding Featured in House Budget Resolution Announcing the Computing Research Policy TumbleLog Innovation Press Conference and Hearing
CRA Links
Computing Research News
CRA-Bulletin Computing Data and Resources CRA in the News Computing Research in the FY05 Budget
What We're Reading
Computational Complexity
CNSR Online Danger Room Defense Tech Freedom to Tinker InsideHPC Lessig Blog Nothing is as simple... Reed's Ruminations Schneier on Security Techdirt UMBC eBiquity Blog USACM Tech Policy Blog
Advocacy Materials
IT R&D One-pager (pdf)
DARPA and University Research One-pager (pdf) Cyber Security R&D One-pager (pdf) Current and Requested IT R&D Funding Charts (pdf)
Recent Testimony
|
March 25, 2005DOE/IBM's Blue Gene Nearly Doubles its Speed RecordBBC coverage of the jump to 135.5 teraflops. ZDNet has more. The feat won't show up on the current Top500.org list until they release the next revision of the list, which I think will be in May (the last was released in November at the Supercomputing 2004 conference in Pittsburgh, and it seems to be issued at six month intervals). Update: John West, Director of the ERDC MSRC -- one of four DOD HPC program centers -- e-mails with a helpful clarification: Top500 lists are published twice a year: in June and in November. The November list is announced at the annual Supercomputing series of conferences (www.supercomp.org), which is probably part of the reason for its not-quite-six-months timing.He also notes that the LINPACK score (upon which the Top500 list is based) isn't the best way to assess a supercomputer's relative benefit to a discipline, despite it's popularity -- something I probably should have noted in my post. In my defense, as limited as the LINPACK score is in what it says about a particular machine, it is the one number most people out here (certainly in the policy world) cling to when trying to understand progress in supercomputing. Though it wasn't the message we sought to convey, the fact that the Japanese Earth Simulator was X teraflops faster than our "best" machine certainly focused the mind of a lot of policymakers in Congress last year, for better or worse. In talking about high-end computing with them, we certainly tried not to emphasize that measure; rather, we tried to talk about the importance of a sustained research effort on a diverse set of approaches to enable progress on a wide range of different problems. John also notes that there are some interesting efforts to develop a new metric coming out of DARPA's HPCS program, but those measures are likely to be a bit more complex -- almost certainly spelling doom for their adoption over the "one number fits all" of the LINPACK. Posted by PeterHarsha at March 25, 2005 09:19 AM | TrackBackPosted to R&D in the Press | Research Comments
Post a comment
|