Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Intel's 1 teraflop chip, exascale computing needs better story

By | November 16, 2011, 6:27am PST

Summary: Intel’s Knights Corner processor highlights how a huge system from 1997 can now be crammed on a single chip breaking the 1 teraflop mark. Now what?

Intel on Tuesday demonstrated a single 50-core chip that is the first to break the 1 teraflop barrier. This chip, dubbed Knight Corner, is the first commercial processor based on Intel’s Many Integrated Core architecture.

Rajeeb Hazra, general manager of technical computing, Intel data center and the connected systems group, outlined the company’s plans to remain the top supercomputer dog at SC11 in Seattle.

Intel was touting its Xeon E5 family, which supports PCI Express 3.0 I/O integration and powers 10 supercomputers on the Top 500 list.

The broader theme from Intel is that Knights Corner highlights how a huge system from 1997 can now be crammed on a single chip. Knight Corner will be manufactured with Intel’s 3-D Tri-Gate 22nm process and features more than 50 cores.

Intel’s big plan is to get to exascale computing in 2018. Exascale computing would be a thousand times faster than petascale, the ability to operate beyond a petaflop. The petaflop is one quadrillion floating point operations per second.

To that end, Intel has four labs in Europe—Paris, Julich, Leuven and Barcelona—to focus on performance, reliability, simulation and visualization and tools and algorithms. Exascale computing will need multiple disciplines—interconnects, power management, reliability, memory, parallel software and processors—to come together.

The demonstration of a 1 teraflop chip is notable, but Intel really needs a better story to tell. I got a briefing on Intel’s supercomputer happenings and the storyline broke down like this.

  • We have one chip that is the first to break the teraflop barrier.
  • It’s the foundation for high performance computing for years.
  • It’s exascale or bust.

To Intel, this Knights Corner chip was huge. However, I’m moving beyond the performance storyline—especially given the good-enough-technology trend. Historically speaking, Intel’s answer for everything is better performance, more muscle and manufacturing breakthroughs. Intel does it well. But in the end, I want the narrative. What exactly is possible with exascale computing? I’m just not bright enough to know what’s possible and need the possibilities pointed out. A few key questions:

  • Does exascale computing lead to Skynet?
  • What algorithm possibilities are enabled by exascale computing?
  • What are the artificial intelligence implications?
  • And what are the scientific possibilities?

Too often with technology vendors we get the breakthrough but not the possibilities. I’m sure Intel’s Knights Corner development will be a huge over time, but I increasingly want a narrative to connect the dots.

Related:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

51
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Intel's 1 teraflop chip, exascale computing needs better story
deusexmachina  Updated - 27th Nov
@DickCheney777
Um, no.
That is a GPU, and as such, has no real comparative value for CPU speed comparisons. The entire architecture of a GPU, including pipeline length, branch prediction hardware, etc., does not lend itself at all to general purpose computing, which is why they aren't rushing to build GPU-powered computers.
Clock ratings for GPUs and FP op counts do not give a complete picture of a devices speed. 1TF in a general purpose CPU is a BIG deal.
Are you questioning the need or fueling technology paranoia? Skynet! Are you kidding?
@jgoode@...

Paranoia? People watch too many movies -- computers become self-aware in one moment and then want to destroy us in the second. Why is that?
@alsw

Have you looked around lately?
@alsw You're not reading your Dilbert calendar, are you? The spam filter became self aware, and, today, Alice has her fist of death stuck in the murderous robot.
@alsw, Perhaps they will find humans as annoying as do I.
@jgoode@...

Just think of any Supercomputer like Deep Throat or a similar one out of the top 500 list - but without the necessity of an unhandy power plant...
@jgoode@...
If it's made using outdated x86 technology, sky net will be impossible.
0 Votes
+ -
Of course.
Cayble 17th Nov
@Bakabaka

The operative question was:
"Does exascale computing lead to Skynet?"

Thats 'LEAD' to Skynet. Like some several generations down the line once someone discovers an A.I. compatible type of programming. Imagine throwing the switch for the first time on that system. Not knowing exactly what it would do, and it certainly would be able to speak. What would you say, and how would you answer if you were the one to hear the first words once the thing was turned on, when you hear the words "Hello. What is this?...What am I...?"
@jgoode@... Skynet? I just want to know if it's powerful enough to run Crysis yet?
0 Votes
+ -
Ha! Run it?
Cayble 17th Nov
@thoiness

It would create it then own it.
A GTX 590 can push around 2.5 Teraflops. Its available right now...
0 Votes
+ -
Dual CPU (sorry GPU)
thandermax 16th Nov
@DickCheney777 not single chip solution
@thandermax GF110 (GTX 580) does 1.5TF
@DickCheney777
that's single precision floating point, this new intel chip offers 1TFLOP double precision which Nvidia can't touch...
@korel31 Are you sure? Then it's quite low, Radeon 6990 can do over 5 TFLOPs in single precision and over 1 TFLOP in double.
@DickCheney777 Exactly, it's comparable to current GPUs.
0 Votes
+ -
@DickCheney777
Um, no.
That is a GPU, and as such, has no real comparative value for CPU speed comparisons. The entire architecture of a GPU, including pipeline length, branch prediction hardware, etc., does not lend itself at all to general purpose computing, which is why they aren't rushing to build GPU-powered computers.
Clock ratings for GPUs and FP op counts do not give a complete picture of a devices speed. 1TF in a general purpose CPU is a BIG deal.
If you became self aware and noted that the current apex predator (humans) spent 1 billion on teletubbies...well I'd nuke us also.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/business/media/26adcol.html
0 Votes
+ -
Who knows...
Cayble 17th Nov
@rgor@...

That might be all it takes.
it seems that your first question about Skynet might provide enough narrative to answer the last two questions... It does seem that it is getting into outer space numbers where the words for the distances really don't say how far apart things are. The question of "What does it all mean?" is very valid.
0 Votes
+ -
Great for my next laptop
amasys 16th Nov
If i can just figure out to turn it on?
BF3 at full retinal display in 3-D
@JOHN_TUOHY Holodecks!
@tkeller@...

Not really. The idea of a holodeck is that photons are generated in a way that their combined pressure creates the physical sensation of solid matter, not just visual sensations. It's pretty unlikely such a technology is even possible.
To this day, I spend a lot more time waiting for the harddrive and network than I ever do for the CPU. Especially now that there are multiple CPUs in a laptop chip. when will the mass storage catch up with the CPU. Another question is whether or not the RAM can even keep up. I'm sure eventually, but I need to do a job now, not eventually.
0 Votes
+ -
Any serious photo or video editor knows that we could use 100X (photo) and 1000X (video) the current CPU speed today. AND, I'm not talking about the pros who could use even more. Make this affordable and able to run Windows 64 bit software and these users will buy them. I'm surprised no gamers have chimed in, think about the realism improvements, the mind boggles.
@BillFerreira Nonsense.
1. There is no practical use for 100x/1000x power for photo editing. Maybe additional research could find some use for it, but I have no idea what would you want to do that curent software can't do.
2. It's entirely comparable to current gaming systems. And unless it can make much more than that in single precision, then it would be actually much slower.
0 Votes
+ -
@MadDonkey
It is in no way comparable to current gaming systems. The entire architecture of a GPU, including pipeline length, branch prediction hardware, etc., does not lend itself at all to general purpose computing, which is why they aren't rushing to build GPU-powered computers.
Clock ratings for GPUs and FP op counts do not give a complete picture of a devices speed. 1TF in a general purpose CPU is a BIG deal.
When are we going to see this chip implemented in systems that mere mortals can afford?
@wrcousert When are we going to have mere mortals that need a TeraFLOP for everyday computing? X-D
@Imrhien Imagine how fast you could recalculate your spreadsheet! The mind boggles. happy
@Imrhien That Radio Shack salesman that sold me my first computer said something similar. Actually he said, "That 40mb hard drive is as big as you will ever need!" We know how that turned out, don't we.
@Usad
Somebody told me in 1999 that the 4GB hard drive available then would be more than I'd ever need. It lasted a couple of months before I had to upgrade.

@Imrhien
I'm running an Intel 965 Core i7 with 24GB RAM and I reach 70% loads. I offload as much work as I can to my server which runs consistently at 50% and works up to 90% at times, and has similar specs to my desktop. I think I could use more processing power, but I'd really appreciate faster write speeds to physical storage.
@Imrhien When Windows 10 is released and the minimum specs are 40+ cores, 2 terabytes of RAM, and the base install requires 340 terabytes of HDD space. This just so we can surf the net and write documents which we could do with Win95.
Don't worry about what teraflop computing will bring - OS overhead, enhanced interface techniques and malware mitigation will use most of it. flash-based websites will use the rest.
@redking44 ROFLMAO! And in another ten years our phones will have chips this powerful in them
@redking44 OK. That one made me LOL. For real.
@redking44

LOL! Should have read your post before bothering to post mine...
When is this going to end up on the desktop???!!!
I am currently using it for double precision computing (Milkyway) via BONIC
Oh!!! One more thing...we may not need it after all...
Because 'Euclidean' an Australian company has figured out how to do unlimited detail/animation fast in software!
They have $2 million from the Aussie Govt and maybe others to bring it to market, Demo and SDK soon...I hope! If they marry this to a video card or to a cpu it should be nice! Especially this 1 Teraflop on a chip.
"Nobody will ever need more than (fill in the blank)..."
Wow. SQL licensing due to 2012's rules would be horrendous on this chip. I foresee a mass exodus to MySQL.
Looking for a narrative? Isn't that your job, mate?
@ThatOtherApple duly noted, but my point is that the approach is "hey we're faster" but there's little to bring it home to real world applications.
BUT - as Seymour Cray often put it - there are many, many problems that are simply NOT capable of being solved by use of parallel processing! (Encryption schemes are often in that category!) What is needed is some further work in the super-scalar world - and multiple cores do not help.
???Does exascale computing lead to Skynet?
???What algorithm possibilities are enabled by exascale computing?
???What are the artificial intelligence implications?
???And what are the scientific possibilities?


INTEL build CPU's, not software applications, who knows what people will do with that processing power, but the simple fact is, it's a CPU that crunches numbers quickly.

It is just as totally unable to become self aware as your shoe !!

It is not a special purpose CPU it is a CPU that processes information very fast, so any application that can gain from that ability will gain from that.
All of the big interest in "unstructured data" is about people and population control. We are all headed towards a world where every bit of information they can collect on you will be analyzed to come up with somewhat accurate predictions of what you will do next. So pray that people with your habits do not commit crimes, or are doing things that the current government does not approve of (ie OWS). The processing power increase as well as the data analysis functionality will drive us the the long delayed 1984 scenario.
0 Votes
+ -
Barrier? Or milestone?
HypnoToad72 17th Nov
I had no idea the speed gods were overtly trying to prevent something...

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]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix