httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cs1Zs-VuJk
In light of the recent controversy over the validity of the TOP500, I thought it would be good to reprise this interview with Sharan Kalwani on why he thinks the benchmark needs to evolve to catch up with modern HPC. And while this 2011 interview originally appeared on TOP500.org, that page (pictured below) has somehow vanished.
“Our design philosophy is centered around our customers. They need solutions that are not just technically advanced but also seamlessly integrated, easily scalable, and reliable.”
The recent research included in this report from Cognizant’s Center for the Future of Work reveals what separates leaders from laggards when it comes to using data and artificial intelligence to make better decisions. The report also explores business leaders’ attitudes about using AI for decision making—but also clearly demonstrates that their actions do not yet match their optimism.
What is the controversy?
As described by Bill Kramer, NCSA did not submit a benchmark result for the Blue Water supercomputer to the TOP500 even though the system would have easily ranked in top ten. The reason cited by Kramer is that the LINPACK benchmark used is not a valid performance benchmark of modern systems and that acquiring supercomputers based on potential TOP500 ranking hurts users.
Read more: http://www.ncsa.illinois.edu/News/Stories/TOP500problem/
Nevermind… I missed your previous post. Thanks for the info!
It can’t really be said to be a controversy when everyone agrees it’s a useless metric to measure capability by.