India Coffee House Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (1642)	6/24/1998 2:30:00 AM
From: Nandu	Read Replies (1) of 12475

Whenever it comes to claims about PARAM, one should ask about the 100 x 100 64-bit All-Fortran LINPACK benchmark. Where in the world are the LINPACK numbers for PARAM? After all, if the Intel Paragon (a machine similar in architecture to PARAM) can do 9.8 MFLOPS, PARAM should be able to get some number similar to that. Why is that figure not available at all? Is it because they have been unable to even execute the benchmark on 1 CPU of the PARAM? Or is it because the number is so pathetically low (~ 1 MFLOP or less) that C-DAC (the maker of PARAM) was unwilling to release it? Around the time the PARAM 1000 was announced there was a news Item in clari.world.asia.india where some Indian scientist claimed that its real throughput was only 4% of the peak. Peak performance numbers are usually estimated multiplying single CPU numbers by the number of CPUs and are basically meaningless for supercomputers. After the N tests, there was a news item, (I don't remember if I read it at Rediff or the Indian Express), where it was mentioned that the PARAM was not and is not being used for the nuclear program.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next