World's fastest computer

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: aigomorla
The military is always bragging on how precise there stuff is. Being that accurate comes with great computation power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...se_embassy_in_Belgrade

I've no doubt the accuracy and precision of the military's bombing capability, but sometimes it seems they wish they could argue it is much much less.

blah...

no comment....

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: aigomorla
The military is always bragging on how precise there stuff is. Being that accurate comes with great computation power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...se_embassy_in_Belgrade

I've no doubt the accuracy and precision of the military's bombing capability, but sometimes it seems they wish they could argue it is much much less.

Yet you wonder why they're looking to upgrade?

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: aigomorla
The military is always bragging on how precise there stuff is. Being that accurate comes with great computation power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...se_embassy_in_Belgrade

I've no doubt the accuracy and precision of the military's bombing capability, but sometimes it seems they wish they could argue it is much much less.

Yet you wonder why they're looking to upgrade?

Hey, it is getting better now. Rather missing from a "few" miles it's now a few feet.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Peelback79
So they finally built a computer that can run Crysis maxed out?

Yes and with AMD chips

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: Diogenes2
Do you know what a peta-FLOP is ?

Flop, Floating point Operations per second
Peta is a metric prefix that means 10^15 * unit. Ultimately a bad measurement of speed as floating point operations aren't everything. (AMD boasted the Floating point operations of their Phenom). Though, when dealing with mostly scientific data I guess it could be considered useful.

What I'm saying is it doesn't give very good comprehension its like if the question was "How much water is in the ocean" and the answer to be "Well, if all of the earths six billion people stood outside in 90*F weather and the sweat was collected for X years thats how much water you would have" you might as well just say "Its a lot"

Heck, a better comparison would be to say that the standard computer is capable of X flops. or that the 7000 AMD processors is like having 7000 desktops strung together. Either would give a slightly more accurate representation of what a flop is or how powerful the computer is. But then, maybe that doesn't strike as much awe as the calculator example.

 

[taltamir]

world fastest computer was built eh? its been a month already?

 

[Griswold]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: biostud
yay!!!! nuclear weapons are so much cooler than cure for cancer!

honestly, if you have nuclear missles which are all vector dependant on a computer.

That computer controlling the course of that missle better be something out of this world.

The last thing the military would ever want is OOPS we hit city X instead of City Y.


The military is always bragging on how precise there stuff is. Being that accurate comes with great computation power.

Just that this machine has nothing to do with target accuracy or impact vectors... they also wont use it to simulate the annihilation of cities or countries but instead to simulate what happens within and during a nuclear detonation to increase efficiency and reliability. The only other option would be live tests... and we dont want that anymore, right?

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: biostud
yay!!!! nuclear weapons are so much cooler than cure for cancer!

honestly, if you have nuclear missles which are all vector dependant on a computer.

That computer controlling the course of that missle better be something out of this world.

The last thing the military would ever want is OOPS we hit city X instead of City Y.


The military is always bragging on how precise there stuff is. Being that accurate comes with great computation power.

Just that this machine has nothing to do with target accuracy or impact vectors... they also wont use it to simulate the annihilation of cities or countries but instead to simulate what happens within and during a nuclear detonation to increase efficiency and reliability. The only other option would be live tests... and we dont want that anymore, right?

All kidding put aside, you are right. But I don't think we have to worry about "Live" testing anymore. Well, as far as we know it:

A Quote from UPI: "NNSA officials say the Dual-Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico is now fully operational. Since 1992, when President George H.W. Bush ordered a voluntary moratorium, the United States hasn't produced any new nuclear weapons or conducted any underground nuclear tests.

As a result, the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile is reaching an age when scientists originally projected the weapons would expire. With the DARHT facility now operational, officials will be able to assess and certify the weapons stockpile without underground nuclear testing, the NNSA reported".

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: Diogenes2
Do you know what a peta-FLOP is ?

Flop, Floating point Operations per second
Peta is a metric prefix that means 10^15 * unit.

I think I had that covered...

Heck, a better comparison would be to say that the standard computer is capable of X flops.

It would take a long time on a standard system... about 5.5 hours for my system to do the amount of work RR does in one second...

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Drsignguy

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Just that this machine has nothing to do with target accuracy or impact vectors... they also wont use it to simulate the annihilation of cities or countries but instead to simulate what happens within and during a nuclear detonation to increase efficiency and reliability. The only other option would be live tests... and we dont want that anymore, right?

As a result, the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile is reaching an age when scientists originally projected the weapons would expire. With the DARHT facility now operational, officials will be able to assess and certify the weapons stockpile without underground nuclear testing, the NNSA reported".

You wouldn't want your nuclear weapons going pop instead of BANG if you ever really needed them...

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: Drsignguy

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Just that this machine has nothing to do with target accuracy or impact vectors... they also wont use it to simulate the annihilation of cities or countries but instead to simulate what happens within and during a nuclear detonation to increase efficiency and reliability. The only other option would be live tests... and we dont want that anymore, right?

As a result, the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile is reaching an age when scientists originally projected the weapons would expire. With the DARHT facility now operational, officials will be able to assess and certify the weapons stockpile without underground nuclear testing, the NNSA reported".

You wouldn't want your nuclear weapons going pop instead of BANG if you ever really needed them...

As nuclear weapons are more about psychological deterence than actual physical deliverance the primary objective is to ensure that would-be aggressors don't elect to take the gamble that our nukes will merely go pop instead of bang.

The agenda here (i.e. why is the government so vocal about there progress in this arena of managing our nuke arsenal) is to ensure folks are not willing to bet our nukes have become non-functional owing to the lack of testing to prove otherwise.

We don't need the simulations to be correct, merely need people to believe they are correct.