Get a load of this...
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology, (Australia's main source of weather reports), spent A$30 million dollars on a supercomputer, and it is only capable of 1.8 teraflops.
Now, this is approximately 18% of the full computing potential of the Virginia Tech supercluster, and yet it cost 447% as much, (A$30 million to US$5.2 million).
Now, that's money well spent... m.
Now, this is approximately 18% of the full computing potential of the Virginia Tech supercluster, and yet it cost 447% as much, (A$30 million to US$5.2 million).
Now, that's money well spent... m.
Comments
Originally posted by Merovingian
The Australian Bureau of Meteorology, (Australia's main source of weather reports), spent A$30 million dollars on a supercomputer, and it is only capable of 1.8 teraflops.
Now, this is approximately 18% of the full computing potential of the Virginia Tech supercluster, and yet it cost 447% as much, (A$30 million to US$5.2 million).
Now, that's money well spent... m.
Well how much did the facility cost to host it?
Add that and then consider that the software it runs, and realize that porting it over would be a multi million dollar task, so it works out.
Ok, I call bulls*** on myself.
when was it bought?
The machine went online last month.
They might be kicking themselves now, but they can't really have known the VA Tech thing would work out in July. They might not even have heard of the attempt. NEC, on the other hand, is a proven supercomputer vendor.