Electronic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Petaflops At War
   Next Article → COUNTER-TERRORISM: Involuntary Martyrs Finish Off Al Qaeda In Iraq
June 7, 2010: DARPA, the U.S. Department of Defense advanced research organization, has asked computer hardware developers to come up with a very powerful supercomputer (speed of one petaflop, or a million billion floating point operations per second, otherwise known as FLOPS), that is small enough to fit into a cabinet 61x198x102 cm (24x78x40 inches) and require no more than 57 kilowatts to operate (including cooling). This ExtremeScale supercomputer would be flown out to combat zones, run off generator power and perform analysis of images and other data, to determine where the enemy is and what they are up to. This sort of predictive analysis has become a major weapon in the last decade, and it needs more computer power to be even more useful. There are currently portable PC cards that will goose a PC up to 20 teraflops (a thousand billion FLOPS). Currently, the most powerful PC can do 50 gigaflops (billion FLOPS). That, in turn, is faster than the fastest supercomputers of the early 1990s. In this area, progress isn't marching on, it's sprinting.

If the ExtremeScale supercomputer existed right now, only three supercomputers on the planet would be faster. But DARPA does not expect the ExtremeScale supercomputer to be ready for action for eight years. By then, one petaflop would be lucky to be in the top hundred supercomputers.

The military has long been a major user of supercomputers (the fastest computers on the planet). Actually, these machines were first developed, as were the first computers, for military applications. These ultra-powerful computers are used for code breaking, and to help design weapons (including nukes) and equipment (especially electronics). The military is also needs lots of computing power for data mining (pulling useful information, about the enemy, from ever larger masses of information.)

Because there's never enough money to buy all the super-computers (which are super expensive) needed, military researchers have come up with ways to do it cheaper. A decade ago, it was military researchers who figured out how to use of GPUs (Graphic Processing Units, from high end graphic cards) for non-graphic computing. GPUs do something similar to what supercomputers do (lots of math calculations of a fairly simple type), and eventually the manufacturers of GPUs realized that there was a commercial (not just military) demand for GPUs serving as supercomputers.

Three years ago, the Tesla supercomputer add-on for PCs appeared on the market. This was basically an Nvidia graphics board tweaked to act like a supercomputer, rather than a device that put 3-D, photo-realistic game graphics on your computer screen. The latest version of this system will give you a PC with four teraflops of computing power for under $10,000. The Tesla now has competition, as demand for these PC supercomputers has been huge since they were first introduced three years ago.

The Cell Processor on the PlayStation 3 (PS 3) is also a GPU, and that GPU alone was used to built several of the fastest supercomputers on the planet. But military researchers were quick to note that some versions of the PS 3 could be tweaked to run Linux, and the software required to produce supercomputer results from the PS 3s Cell processor. Since the PS 3 is sold below cost (so buyers will purchase lots of very profitable games), the U.S. military has bought thousands of PS 3s for training systems, not to be used as inexpensive supercomputers.

DARPA is encouraging supercomputer development, with cash and the promise of military sales, and the industry is responding. Several firms believe they can have the ExtremeScale supercomputer in service way before 2018. In addition, lesser (.5 petaflop or betters) supercomputers will probably be available earlier as well. And they will be cheap, costing a few hundred thousand dollars each. The current generation of senior commanders grew up with PCs. They understand what computers can do, they know that whoever has the most petaflops, will more likely prevail in future conflicts.

 

Next Article → COUNTER-TERRORISM: Involuntary Martyrs Finish Off Al Qaeda In Iraq
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Gerry       6/7/2010 9:25:16 PM
To think that a few peta flops may be very common 30 years from now is mind boggling.
 
Quote    Reply

hunter12       6/8/2010 1:15:02 AM
A petaflop is a thousand trillion floating point operations per second guys.
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector       6/8/2010 1:25:48 AM

Apollo placed men on our moon with 40 kilobytes computational availability.  The PRC is said to have simulated fusion for weapons designs that worked per prediction by literally warehousing graduate students with abaci in parallel.  Four decades ago.  The historical rate of computational growth is truly astounding.  Yet in comparison with what we believe is possible very near-term (five years out) exploiting tera appears rather mundane.  The US MUST maintain its computational lead, to include algorithmic optimizations, or its scientific and engineering progress will wither relative to the contenders.  Human thought interpretation and control are on the horizon.  Stupid machines, they will harbor our essence as individuals and collectives ;>)  0.02

v^2

 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       6/8/2010 1:46:24 AM
Why is important to get a mainframe close to the battlefield ? Perhaps network transfers could be intercepted ? Or, there is some specific problem with satellite links ?
 
DG

 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       6/8/2010 4:07:52 AM

Why is important to get a mainframe close to the battlefield ? Perhaps network transfers could be intercepted ? Or, there is some specific problem with satellite links ?

DG

The problem is the satellite links, there just are never going to be enough of them available to satisfy demand.  The solution is to process the data locally, or at least preprocess it enough to eliminate 90% of it as junk.
 
 The real problem is going to be cooling the thing fast enough to keep it from melting.
 
Quote    Reply

C2    I don't want to be argumentative but,   6/10/2010 7:33:35 AM
Speed of process is not a measurement of intellect...
Just as IQ is not a measurement of artistic merit, but rather the speed at which a logical problem can be solved and to what degree with regards to its relative difficulty.

The key to our souls is our ability to understand 'I' , but what's more it is to conceptualise the abstract and self determinate, all of these things are software related, and when we reach that level of understanding I'm sure such a life could run on my laptop, in what capacity I don't.

Having said that new instruction sets may be needed to handle asymmetric extrapolations... 
 
Quote    Reply