Follow this blog:
RSS

Japan system crowned supercomputer champ as petaflop age emerges

By | June 20, 2011, 7:58 AM PDT

For the first time, the top 10 supercomputers in the world operate at a petaflop scale as China continues to move up the high-performance computing charts to chase the U.S.

Japan’s K Computer, which can crunch more than 8 quadrillion calculations per second, is the top supercomputer, according to the Top 500 list of high-performance systems.

The K Computer, housed at the RIKEN Advanced Institute for Computational Science in Kobe, puts Japan back in the top spot for the first time since Nov. 2004.

On Monday, the Top 500 list was outlined at the International Supercomputing Conference in Hamburg. These systems are ranked based on their Linpack scores, an application designed to solve dense linear equations.

The biggest takeaway on the list is that a system needs to operate at a petaflop per second scale to break the top 10. The U.S. has five systems operating at a petaflop scale, Japan and China have two each and France has one.

Japan’s K Computer bumped the previous top dog—China’s Tianhe-1A supercomputer. The K Computer is built by Fujitsu and has 548,352 cores, or 68,544 SPARC64 VIIIfx CPUs with eight cores each. It’s also notable that the K Computer doesn’t use graphics processors or accelerators.

Other odds and ends:

  • China has 62 systems in the Top 500 list to be No. 2 to the U.S.
  • Intel has 77.4 percent of the systems in the list.
  • Quad-core processors are used in 46.2 percent of the systems with 42.4 percent using six or more cores.
  • Nvidia GPUs power 19 systems in the list.

Source: ZDNet: Japan’s ‘K Computer’ takes supercomputer crown

Also see:

Japan takes Top500 supercomputer crown from China

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Larry Dignan

About Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is the editor-in-chief of SmartPlanet.

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan

Editor-in-Chief

Larry Dignan is editor-in-chief of SmartPlanet and ZDNet. He is also editorial director of TechRepublic. Previously, he was an editor at eWeek, Baseline and CNET News. He has written for WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, New York Times and Financial Planning. He holds degrees from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and the University of Delaware. He is based in New York but resides in Pennsylvania.

Follow him on Twitter.

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan
Larry Dignan does not hold any investments in the companies he covers.
If you liked this, don't miss...
7
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
Definition of quadrillion
Question - which quadrillion are you using US or the British one that used by most of the rest of the world - US = 0ne thousand million million - British = one million million million million - there is a lot of difference methinks?
Posted by Bertie174
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: Supercomputer
Japan???s K Computer can crunch more than 8 quadrillion calculations per second.

This improves my life how?
Posted by bb_apptix
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
quadrillion definition
The peta- prefix is 10^15, one thousand trillion (one thousand million million) - the US quadrillion definition. According to Google, the 10^24 defintion is rarely used.
Posted by 0David
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
HOW? are you kidding?
Let's see: No need to use animals in experiments, increasing the use and application of a million different ways to do or improve THINGS.(don't be childish and ask 'What things?!') Small thought to make such a statement. IMHO
Posted by Solution1
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Re: Definition of quadrillion
You sparked interest.

Long and short scales (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the United Kingdom uniformly used the long scale,[3] while the United States of America used the short scale,[3] so that usage of the two systems was often referred to as British and American respectively. In 1974, the government of the UK switched to the short scale, a change that is reflected in its mass media and official usage.[4][5][6][7] Although some residual usage of the long scale continues in the UK,[8] the phrases British usage and American usage are no longer accurate characterisations.

The long and short scales are two of several different large-number naming systems used throughout the world for integer powers of ten (10).[1] Many countries, including most in continental Europe, use the long scale whereas most English-speaking countries use the short scale. In all such countries, the number names are translated into the local language, but retain a name similarity due to shared etymology. Some languages, particularly in East Asia, have large number naming systems that are different from the long and short scales.

Long scale is the English translation of the French term ??chelle longue. It refers to a system of large-number names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000,000 times the previous term: billion means a million millions (1012, or (106)2), trillion means a million billions (1018, or (106)3), and so on. Short scale is the English translation of the French term ??chelle courte. It refers to a system of large-number names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000 times the previous term: billion means a thousand millions (109), trillion means a thousand billions (1012), and so on.

For integers less than a thousand million ( 109), the two scales are identical. At and above a thousand million (??? 109), the two scales diverge by using the same words for different number values. These false friends[2] can be a source of misunderstanding.

Usage of the two systems can be a subject of controversy. Differences in opinion as to which system should be used can evoke resentment between adherents, while national differences of any kind can acquire jingoistic overtones.[9]

NOTE: The first paragraph, herein, was cut/pasted there; for interest gathering.
Posted by evasave
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
Competition
As has always been the case, computer hardware is leaps and bounds ahead of the software written to use it. Also, not to be disregarded is the peripheral equipment (buses, etc.). So, the multi-cores churn out petaflops per second but the disks used to store that data are lollygagging along at millionths of a second.

The whole "fastest" competition is silly. It exists just for its own sake.
Posted by dangnad
20th Jun 2011
+1 Vote
+ -
True definition of "Super computer"...
I believe this article (and most modern thinking on "supercomputers") is missing the most basic point in the definition of what a "supercomputer" really is. The article references what really is a super-parallel *NOT* a super-computer system. A true super computer is one where a single CPU in one step after another until the end of the program fetches, decodes & executes faster than any other available single CPU system. The true test of a real super computer is not complex multi-input parallel processing weather pattern or atomic level phenomena analysis but rather how fast a step by step problem where the output from step 1 processing is required as input to step 2 etc. can be solved. In simpler terms a super computer system is one with the fastest straight line instruction rate for one CPU, not the greatest aggregate rate for the largest collection of parallel CPUs.
Posted by jcoffey73
21st Jun 2011
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!