- Apr 27, 2000
- 19,165
- 7,925
- 136
Summit has been dethroned by A64FX. That's a heck of a linpack score, doncha think? And it did that without even using all of its nodes.
Frontier will also usher us into the new era of heterogeneous compute which will be the future of high performance computing.Frontier is supposed to come online next year I believe which will replace this at the top spot with 3X the flops and El Capitan a year after that at 4X the flops, at least on paper. It will be interesting to compare the power use and actual linpack score (if they submit it) when the new ones come online.
What's cool is it does this without using a GPU.
Summit has been dethroned by A64FX. That's a heck of a linpack score, doncha think? And it did that without even using all of its nodes.
Frontier is using GPUs so it’s not a fair one to one comparison.Very impressive, though I am a bit surprised at the power use.
Frontier is supposed to come online next year I believe which will replace this at the top spot with 3X the flops and El Capitan a year after that at 4X the flops, at least on paper. It will be interesting to compare the power use and actual linpack score (if they submit it) when the new ones come online.
Yes it's not 1:1 but I don't see how it's not fair. I understand your point and agree to a point, but it's not like A64X is a vanilla ARM core, they added ML instructions and SVE 512 bit pathways to make it a competitive HPC device. It was a system design choice to not include GPUs. I'm not going to claim to be any kind of expert on supercomputers, but I'm sure that having a single programming model was a big motivation here, but this system will be compared to other recent and soon to come online supercomputers. AMD and Intel are trying to bring these heterogeneous programming models that @ThatBuzzkiller mentioned to bridge the GPU and CPU compute capabilities. Not just performance but also performance per total system power will be interesting to see because the A64X supercomputer didn't move the needle in this regard. It's actually a pretty exciting time in CPU/server tech right now with the most legit players we've seen in a long time. Should be a fun ride.Frontier is using GPUs so it’s not a fair one to one comparison.
GPUs significantly add to the flops.
Indeed. Fujitsu has touted A64FX as a serious competitor to GPU/compute cards. Intel mostly failed to compete with AVX512 against compute accelerators. It seems like Fujitsu has had more luck with SVE. Seems. There would have to be perf/watt and perf/area comparisons to really know what is the most-efficient way to deploy a supercomputer.What's cool is it does this without using a GPU.
Does not matter. Everything will be beaten by Tachyum.It's pretty surprising that out-of-order CPU can outperform GPU what is specialized highly parallel SIMD machine based on VLIW or in-order cores. And CPU is much more flexible, it can handle general purpose code, especially OoO core, single programming model as @Hitman928 mentioned (also all data in one RAM instead splitting between GPU VRAM and RAM with all sync delays). This looks like breakthrough in supercomputing kind of thing. It's pretty exciting time about CPUs now (Apple moving to ARM, Nuvia super core under development, Tachyum VLIW CPU with Transmeta-like code morphing under development...).
SVE extension is more powerful than I'd expect. The good thing is that SVE2 vectors are coming next year for every ARM core as a part of ARMv9 ISA. Supercomputer in every pocket. It also uncover there is something wrong about AVX512. It failed also in Knight Landing GPU-like cards. ARM with SVE shows much higher performance. That could be big advantage in servers because next year the Matterhorn cores (ARMv9 and SVE2) are coming. This could be a true disaster for stagnating x86.
Every core is faster than a Xeon core or an Epyc core, and it is smaller than an Arm core, and overall, our chip is faster than a GPU on HPC
Well, Tachyum Prodigy looked like BS when I saw it for the first time. However after some digging into it has some interesting features:Does not matter. Everything will be beaten by Tachyum.
I'll believe it when silicon is actually available and lives up to the claims. Until then, I'm skeptical. I've spent a lot of quality time with VLIW and VLIW-oid (IPF) systems, and "amazingly fast and efficient at general purpose code" was not particularly a highlight of the experience.Does not matter. Everything will be beaten by Tachyum.
Do you think you will see silicon?I'll believe it when silicon is actually available and lives up to the claims. Until then, I'm skeptical. I've spent a lot of quality time with VLIW and VLIW-oid (IPF) systems, and "amazingly fast and efficient at general purpose code" was not particularly a highlight of the experience.
It's possible. Tachyum has had a lot of funding coming their way. I'm a lot more skeptical that those chips will do particularly well at general-purpose code, though.Do you think you will see silicon?
Not necessarily. Again, we have no performance/watt or performance/area comparisons available. Theoretically, had Intel's process advantage survived, we would still have AVX512-based Phi products out there doing essentially the same thing, but in the end Phi was still never all THAT great compared GPGPU options. Or someone could put together a world-beater of a Cooper Lake system if they reeeeeeaaaallllly wanted to waste that many nodes and that much power just to beat something like Summit.It's pretty surprising that out-of-order CPU can outperform GPU what is specialized highly parallel SIMD machine based on VLIW or in-order cores.
For me I am just skeptical in general of such promises. I am skeptical of designs which are not in final shape or form which I cannot get to evaluate the advantages of developing on that platform.It's possible. Tachyum has had a lot of funding coming their way. I'm a lot more skeptical that those chips will do particularly well at general-purpose code, though.
All of that is entirely fair.For me I am just skeptical in general of such promises. I am skeptical of designs which are not in final shape or form which I cannot get to evaluate the advantages of developing on that platform.
I manage a number of compute clusters which support our ARM devices on the field which we sell in a B2B framework.
We process enormous amounts of data coming from the fleet which feeds into the verification and validation pipeline of the algorithms (in this day and age it has to be ML accelerated right) we develop that are deployed to said platforms.
(For obvious reasons I cannot show my LinkedIn Account or GitHub Activity)
From experience I stick(If I make a purchase decision or influence if I dont make the decision) with something known or with a vendor known to deliver.
We have had so many vendors delaying products, cancelling products, or product not reaching advertised performance. Time and time and time again.
We have aggressive contracts with most vendors and this has led us to burn bridges with several ARM SoC vendors too.
I have a personal contempt for a specific vendor for ruining the career of some of my colleagues because of promises like these. Big Promises, we evaluate a kit, they say final performance is gonna be huge. We develop our product roadmap on it, and three years later it turns out to be garbage and our Leadership takes the obvious step of culling those who make those platform decisions because of the money and effort and time lost to come up with a competitive product.
Hm, ok maybe we can boil some weird conspiracy theory.And the naming makes me think of AMD's decade old Athlon 64 FX and not modern ARM CPU's
That's the AMD's K12. AMD did cancel it in 2015 but sold the design to Fujitsu and they continued developmentHm, ok maybe we can boil some weird conspiracy theory.
Do you have a source for this info?That's the AMD's K12. AMD did cancel it in 2015 but sold the design to Fujitsu and they continued development
And Jim Keller left AMD due to canceled K12 and he didn't want to move to Japan either.
I think he was kidding.Do you have a source for this info?