Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: The Most Energy-Efficient Linux Computers

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,107

    Default The Most Energy-Efficient Linux Computers

    Phoronix: The Most Energy-Efficient Linux Computers

    For those that missed it, the Green500 list was updated for June 2012. IBM's BlueGene/Q super-computer hardware dominates but there's a few surprises besides that...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEzMDI

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    811

    Default

    With only supercomputers or clusters on the list it's boring.
    There should be something like this for 1-max. 8 cores single computers.
    And all these big machines doing a good computation per watt are useless when they don't numbercrunch all the time. I guess even a minute idle of the huge ones could give me the power to compile libreoffice on my home quad core (and that takes roughly 1.5 h).
    I admit that compiling for yourself isn't the most power efficient thing to do.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    462

    Default

    I don't believe in any of this Communist Global Warming tripe, but it is good to get efficiency, especially if it can reduce bills.

    The problem with Carbon-Communism is bills will increase if the political agenda is allowed to progress.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    272

    Default

    According to the list every green top10 supercomputer has about 2100 MFLOPS. But it would be interesting to know, why there is a so huge power gap. The 8th ranked consumes twelve times more total power than the first

    oh and these supercomputer really don't use very much power if compared to the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) which consumes about 170 MW! That's about as much as all the top 100 supercomputers together

    But some crazy scientists and the elite thinks that this LHC is worth the power and the billons of Euros and dollars.
    Last edited by Fenrin; 06-30-2012 at 04:52 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenrin View Post
    According to the list every green top10 supercomputer has about 2100 MFLOPS. But it would be interesting to know, why there is a so huge power gap. The 8th ranked consumes twelve times more total power than the first

    oh and these supercomputer really don't use very much power if compared to the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) which consumes about 170 MW! That's about as much as all the top 100 supercomputers together

    But some crazy scientists and the elite thinks that this LHC is worth the power and the billons of Euros and dollars.
    Bah, basic science be dammed! Give me moar coars!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenrin View Post
    According to the list every green top10 supercomputer has about 2100 MFLOPS. But it would be interesting to know, why there is a so huge power gap. The 8th ranked consumes twelve times more total power than the first
    That's 2100 MFLOPS PER WATT

    Which makes complete sense with what Michael said - that they are all based off the same supercomputer design.

    The ones that require more power simply have more cores in them, so they get more work done by using more power. Leaving overall efficiency the same in this test since it scales well.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    That's 2100 MFLOPS PER WATT
    [...]
    oh indeed

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •