HPCwire: Who's Driving High Performance Computing?

The Leading Source for Global News and Information Covering the Ecosystem of High Productivity Computing

HPCwire >> Blogs

Blog: From the Editor

July 28, 2006

Who's Driving High Performance Computing?

Gone are the days when the U.S. government alone can determine the direction of supercomputing. The commercial growth of HPC over the last two decades has fundamentally changed that dynamic. Adoption of high performance computing in bio-sciences, the financial sector, geo-sciences, engineering and other areas has changed the supercomputing user base in a relatively short period of time.

For many HPC vendors this is a good thing. IDC reports that revenues for the high performance computing market grew by 24 percent in 2005, reaching $9.2 billion. A majority of this revenue is commercial HPC, although the government still represents a significant share. Classified HPC defense spending alone is over a billion dollars.

But maybe more significantly, the vast majority of really high-end supercomputing and cutting-edge research is done with the support of government money. Most multi-million dollar HPC capability systems reside in government-funded supercomputing centers, federal research labs and various undisclosed locations at national security facilities. In the brave new world of commercial HPC, million-dollar-plus capability platforms are the exception. According to IDC, the revenue for these kinds of systems has actually been declining for several years, as less expensive machines have taken their place. Most of the rapid growth in HPC is the result of commodity-based cluster computing, which represented about half of the $9.2 billion in revenue in 2005.

But the U.S. government has some unique problems to solve. Extremely powerful supercomputers are required to support national security applications like nuclear weapons design and testing, cryptography, and aeronautics. Other commercial and scientific applications in areas such as applied physics, biotechnology/genomics, climatological modeling, and engineering can usually (but not always) make due with less-capable systems. Bleeding-edge commercial applications -- for example, nanoscale simulation of drug interactions -- are emerging, but most of these are being facilitated by government support.

A March 2006 report by the Joint U.S Defense Science Board and the UK Defence Scientific Advisory Council Task Force on Defense Critical Technologies concluded the following:

"Multiple studies, such as the recently completed [November 2004] National Research Council study, conclude that '...the supercomputing needs of the government will not be satisfied by systems developed to meet the demands of the broader commercial market.' The government must bear primary responsibility for ensuring that it has the access to the custom systems that it requires. While leveraging developments in the commercial computing marketplace will satisfy many needs, the government must routinely plan for developing what the commercial marketplace will not, and it must budget the necessary funds."

Last week at a hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Technology, Innovation and Competitiveness, several industry and government representatives offered testimony to address some of these issues.

One of the industry representatives to testify was Christopher Jehn, vice president of Government Programs of Cray Inc. He sounded that alarm that advances in HPC technology have slowed and that the promise of commodity-based supercomputers has not materialized. He attributes this to the fact that general-purpose processors and other commodity-based technologies used to build supercomputers were designed for other purposes -- essentially, personal computing and enterprise computing. The result is that scientists must expend a lot of effort to get HPC software to run efficiently on these homogeneous commodity-based machines.

"Over the last decade, the computer industry has standardized on commodity processors," observed Jehn. "With high volume low-cost processors, supercomputer clusters consisting of commodity parts held out a promise to users of ever-more powerful supercomputers at much lower cost. At the same time, the federal government dramatically reduced investments in supercomputing innovation, leaving the future of supercomputing in the hands of industry. But from industry's perspective, the supercomputing market is not large enough to justify significant investment in unique processor designs and custom interconnects -- as the supercomputer market is less than two percent of the overall server marketplace, according to International Data Corporation. To advance supercomputing, industry has relied on leveraging innovation from the personal computer and server markets."

This reflects Cray's "Adaptive Computing" pitch -- to advance HPC in a meaningful way, we have to move from homogeneous systems to heterogeneous ones. Just scaling up the current architectures won't get us there. The implication is that the government needs to make a significant investment in technology beyond commodity-based computing.

Dr. Irving Wladawsky-Berger, vice president of Technical Strategy and Innovation, IBM, offered a different perspective. He warned that the government cannot afford to ignore market realities when funding HPC projects. During his career he witnessed the failure of supercomputing companies that relied solely on government-based projects and were heedless of marketplace requirements. He related IBM's success with its Blue Gene architecture as an example of leveraging commodity technology -- in this case, PowerPC processors -- to build cutting-edge systems.

"Supercomputing was once confined to a niche market, because the hardware was so very expensive," stated Wladawsky-Berger. "That changed over time with the introduction of workstation and PC-based technologies, the latter becoming immensely popular in Linux clusters during the late 1990s. Today, we even use low-power, low-cost micros -- consumer-based technologies -- to attain very high degrees of parallelism and performance, as in our Blue Gene system, which has reached a peak of 360 trillion calculations per second. Now, we are seeking to build supercomputers using technologies from the gaming world, such as the Cell processor. All these approaches leverage components from high-volume markets, and aggregate them using specialized architectures; thus the costs are significantly lower than in earlier days and the potential markets are consequently much bigger."

From IBM's point of view, Blue Gene is an affirmation that commodity-based supercomputing is a practical model for the future and the government should pay attention to market viability as it looks to invest in new programs.

Dr. Joseph Lombardo, Director National Supercomputing Center for Energy and the Environment at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, described some of the history of the U.S. government's past investments in high performance computing. He suggests that our federal HPC interests, academia and the larger HPC community are all intertwined and the government needs to act accordingly. He noted that after a brief period of interest in "Grand Challenge" applications in the late 1980's and early 1990's, the government switched its focus to distributed computing and COTS technology. He said while these initiatives led to a broader range of individuals working in scientific computing, it also resulted in starving the high-end of HPC R&D. But after the rise of Japanese supercomputing in the 1990's, the U.S. government once again refocused its efforts in high-end supercomputing

"At the end of the 1990's DARPA and other organizations began to see that foreign countries, such as Asian groups, were overtaking the U.S. position in high performance computing once again, and recommended policies that would fund and support the high end of the field once again," said Lombardo. "The DARPA High Productivity Computing Systems program is a good example of this shift back toward an emphasis on high-end capability. The DARPA program is focused on providing a new generation of economically viable high productivity computing systems for the national security and industrial user community in the 2010 timeframe. This trend has continued with the High Performance Computing Revitalization Act, the President's 2006 state of the Union Address, and with the FY 07 budget which increased DOE's high performance computing programs by almost $100 million."

Lombardo's comments suggest that we can balance the government's and industy's need for advanced supercomputing with market realities. He points to the DARPA HPCS program as an example of this approach.

But HPCS may also expose a potential conflict in the government's role. The program's stated goal of "providing a new generation of economically viable high productivity computing systems for national security and for the industrial user community" suggests that HPCS intends to address both the government's and industry's supercomputing needs, and do so within a commercially viable framework. The implication is that all these objectives are compatible.

But national security represents a rather specific set of very high-end supercomputing applications, while the industrial user community represents a very diverse range of HPC users. Can a single supercomputing model (or two) satisfy everyone? Even if we limit the industrial users to potential petascale customers like Boeing, I might still ask the same question.

And what is really meant by "commercially viable?" For supercomputing systems that push the envelope, commercial viability has always been problematic. Vendors usually don't expect such systems to make money straight out of the lab. I understand the desire to produce a general-purpose petascale solution, but I guess it makes me uncomfortable to think the government is going to try to predict the economic viability of a future architecture. After all, DARPA isn't a market research firm.

As commercial HPC continues to expand, the government will be increasingly challenged to control the direction of future supercomputing architectures. Market realities are pushing the hardware and software in a different direction than the needs of some critical high-end HPC users and will probably continue to do so. Such is the nature of capitalism, which, like processor scalability, has its limits. Market forces don't automatically produce optimal results. The government role in HPC, as in other areas, should be to support our national interests.

-----

To find out more about what took place at the Senate's Subcommittee on Technology, Innovation, and Competitiveness hearing on HPC, take a look at our feature article that describes these proceedings. To learn more about the evolving relationship between HPC, the government and business competitiveness, read this week's interview with Suzy Tichenor, Council on Competitiveness vice president, and Bob Graybill, senior Council advisor.

As always, comments about HPCwire are welcomed and encouraged. Write to me, Michael Feldman, at editor@hpcwire.com.

Posted by Michael Feldman - July 28 @ 12:00AM

(Digg, Technorati, more)

Discussion

There are 0 discussion items posted.

Join the Discussion

You must be a registered user in order to comment on HPCwire stories.

Members enjoy:

	Access to Special Content, including Podcasts, Webcasts, and Whitepapers and more!
	Ability to take an active role in the discussions that are shaping the HPC technology discipline!
	Special offers available only to HPCwire members!

Become a Registered User Today!

Registered Users Log in Here to Comment

Email Address:	Password (case sensitive)

Remember me	Forgot Password?

Michael Feldman

Michael Feldman is the editor of HPCwire.

More Michael Feldman

Feature Articles

HPC Powers Bobsled Team to Olympic Gold

For the first time in 62 years, the four-man Olympics bobsled team from the US captured the gold medal, setting a course world record in the process. The winning bobsled had some state-of-the-art engineering behind it, including CFD software from Exa Corporation. As it turned out, that software may have proved to be the margin of difference in the race.
Read More...

The Week in Review

Cray and Microsoft Research partner on cloud computing project; IBM donates a POWER7-based supercomputer to Rice University; and the Kavli Foundation hosts a dialogue on the convergence of nanoscience and neuroscience. We recap those stories and more in our weekly wrapup.
Read More...

Fixstars Launches Linux for CUDA

Multicore software specialist Fixstars Corporation has released Yellow Dog Enterprise Linux (YDEL) for CUDA, the first commercial Linux distribution for GPU computing. The OS is aimed at HPC customers using NVIDIA GPU hardware to accelerate their vanilla Linux clusters, and is designed to lower the overall cost of system deployment, the idea being to bring these still-exotic systems into the mainstream.
Read More...

Read more HPCwire features...

Top Headlines

Can Free Software Drive the Fourth Paradigm?

Mar 09 | Free Software Magazine | Data-driven computing will need open software. Read more...

Graphics Card Maker Turns to High-Performance Bioinformatics

Mar 09 | Bio-IT World | Tahoe Informatics founder eyes GPUs, CUDA software. Read more...

CFD: Light at the End of the Tunnel?

Mar 08 | Sporting Life | Formula One engineers differ on benefits of CFD. Read more...

AMD Tries to Draw Intel Into Chip Battle

Mar 08 | InfoWorld | AMD offers up 48-core server prize. Read more...

HPC Madness: March Is More Cores Month

Mar 04 | Linux Magazine | The new x86 multicore offerings could portend big changes for HPC platforms. Read more...

Read more headlines...

Featured Whitepapers

Virtualization for Aggregation And The vSMP Architecture™

Jan 12 | | In-depth look at vSMP Foundation server virtualization technology, technical implementation, use cases and capabilities. The technical whitepaper provides an architectural overview and details on the three vSMP Foundation products: vSMP Foundation for SMP, vSMP Foundation for Cluster and vSMP Foundation for Cloud.

Copper Cable Technologies for High Performance Computing

Jan 18 | | This white paper discusses Gore’s copper cable assemblies, and how they continue to exceed the standards for providing reliable, cost-effective solutions for high-performance computer applications.

View the White Paper Library

Multimedia

Webcast: Virtualized Data Center Roundtable

Join this online panel discussion for live Q&A with leading industry experts, analysts, and end-users to discuss the latest innovations, best practices, barriers to implementation, and measurable benefits of server virtualization with a particular focus on today's real world solutions.

Webcast: Watch SC09 Birds of a Feather Video: Scalable Fault-Tolerant HPC Supercomputers

Learn about scalable fault-tolerant architectures and examples of energy efficient and scalable supercomputing clusters using dual QDR InfiniBand to combine capacity computing with network failover capabilities with the help of programming languages such as MPI and a robust Linux cluster management package.

Webcast: High Performance Computing for a Smarter Planet

LIVE@SCO9: The IBM team discusses new innovations in hardware, software and services that help clients better understand their workloads and get insight from their R&D efforts. Technology demonstrations include the soon-to-be-released Power7 HPC processor, the DCS990 system with 2.4 petabytes of storage, the xCAT management tool, secure HPC cloud computing and more. Winners of two HPCwire Readers' and Editors’ Choice Awards! Take the IBM virtual tour at SC09 or more information go online to: http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/deepcomputing/sc09.html