Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Wednesday November 18 2015, @02:38AM   Printer-friendly
from the needs-more-cowbell dept.

Intel's Knights-branded Xeon Phi chips remain the most familiar "many-core" accelerators or coprocessors. However, another name has emerged recently: PEZY, whose 1,024-core chips were used in the top 3 most efficient supercomputers. Tom's Hardware reports that PEZY's next generation of chips will boost the core count to 4,096 and integrate Imagination's 64-bit MIPS Warrior CPU onto a system-on-a-chip:

PEZY Computing, a Japanese firm that makes the top three most efficient supercomputers in the world, according to the Green500 list, announced that it will integrate Imagination's highly efficient 64-bit I6400 CPUs into its many-core architecture.

The PEZY SC-2 will be PEZY's next-generation system, which will increase the 1024 core count of the first generation PEZY SC to 4096 cores, or four times more. PEZY's many-core accelerator has been combined with Intel CPUs from top supercomputers to significantly increase their efficiency for computing tasks. For instance, the Shoubo supercomputer, which uses Haswell XEON CPUs and PEZY SC many-core accelerators, was able to break the world record with 7 GFLOPS/W performance.

In the November edition of Green500, the top 23 supercomputers used a heterogeneous architecture with many-core accelerators. In the updated June edition of this year, that number increased by 40 percent, and now the top 32 supercomputers are using many-core accelerators. These supercomputers all use accelerators from AMD, Intel, Nvidia and PEZY. The current top 3 supercomputers are manufactured by PEZY Computing and Exascaler Inc, and include Haswell or Ivy Bridge Xeons as well as PEZY many-core accelerators.

Presumably the integration of the MIPS CPU could allow relatively power-hungry Intel Xeons to be ditched entirely.

Previously: MIPS Strikes Back: 64-bit Warrior I6400 Arrives


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday November 18 2015, @06:49PM

    by TheRaven (270) on Wednesday November 18 2015, @06:49PM (#264998) Journal

    That's a bit weird. For simplicity, did compiler writers just stuff the same instruction in the branch delay slot and the next address after the non-taken branch?

    Typically, you'll just hoist one instruction from the branch target into the delay slot. The idea was that it's easier to find an instruction to stuff in the delay slot if it only has to be from one target, not something that's useful for both targets. If the branch isn't taken, then you have to cancel that instruction, but no one cares because you're in the slow path (you've not taken a likely branch).

    I'm a rabid anti-x86-ite!

    If you're looking for a fun non-x86 platform, Cavium's ThunderX is really nice. They've been giving a few away for open source projects to play with.

    --
    sudo mod me up
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday November 18 2015, @08:34PM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday November 18 2015, @08:34PM (#265060) Homepage
    Arm64's a sell-out. More interested in Cavium OCTEON, to be honest...
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves