←back to thread

93 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
balia ◴[] No.42188494[source]
Some may not want to hear this, but these “fastest supercomputer” list is now meaningless because all the Chinese labs have started obfuscating their progress.

A while ago there were a few labs in China in top 10 and they all attracted sanctions / bad attention. Now no Chinese lab report any data now

replies(3): >>42188546 #>>42188870 #>>42189307 #
cameron_b ◴[] No.42189307[source]
They are in good company, with X, Meta, Microsoft and others not reporting theirs either.

The basis for the ranking was a cumulative tracking of benchmark results that were required as part of commissioning bespoke computers. A contract would be written to buy a computer that could achieve a certain performance in operations per second, and in order to satisfy that the benchmarks were agreed to and codified in the contracts. Government contracts are to a certain extent public information so the goals and clout of successive performance were tracked in this way.

If you don’t need to satisfy a government contract, or don’t need the clout to attract engineers or funding, submitting results draws unwanted attention to what you’re cooking up.

replies(2): >>42189734 #>>42190668 #
1. robocat ◴[] No.42190668[source]
Folding-at-home reports theirs. 2020: "Folding@home project passes 2.4 ExaFLOPS, more than the top 500 supercomputers combined" https://www.techspot.com/news/84832-foldinghome-project-pass...