MONK
24th March 2007, 23:55
Just saw this on the Folding@Home (http://folding.stanford.edu/)website.
With the PS3 launch, we've added a lot of CPU power to Folding@Home, with the total FLOPS now greatly increased an on its way to a Petaflop. Also, we've gotten a lot of crossover interest in the other Folding@Home clients (Win, Lin, OSX; SMP; and GPU), which is also wonderful.
As of 00:00 25/03/2007 in TFLOPS* from the Stats page. (http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=osstats)
Windows 152
Mac OS X/PowerPC 7
Mac OS X/Intel 9
Linux 43
GPU 43
PLAYSTATION®3 647
*TFLOPS is the actual teraflops from the software cores, not the peak values from CPU/GPU/PS3 specs. We take a conservative approach to FLOP calculation, rendering quantities such as exp(x) or sqrt(x) as a single FLOP, if the hardware supports it. This can significantly underestimate the FLOP count (as others would count an exp(x) as 10 or 20 FLOPS, for example).
Roll on 2007 and some serious power play.
With the PS3 launch, we've added a lot of CPU power to Folding@Home, with the total FLOPS now greatly increased an on its way to a Petaflop. Also, we've gotten a lot of crossover interest in the other Folding@Home clients (Win, Lin, OSX; SMP; and GPU), which is also wonderful.
As of 00:00 25/03/2007 in TFLOPS* from the Stats page. (http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=osstats)
Windows 152
Mac OS X/PowerPC 7
Mac OS X/Intel 9
Linux 43
GPU 43
PLAYSTATION®3 647
*TFLOPS is the actual teraflops from the software cores, not the peak values from CPU/GPU/PS3 specs. We take a conservative approach to FLOP calculation, rendering quantities such as exp(x) or sqrt(x) as a single FLOP, if the hardware supports it. This can significantly underestimate the FLOP count (as others would count an exp(x) as 10 or 20 FLOPS, for example).
Roll on 2007 and some serious power play.