TOP500 at ISC’26: We have a New Number 1 Supercomputer

rrbanffy about 2 hours ago 23 commentsRead Article on chipsandcheese.com

FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

82% Positive

Analyzed from 596 words in the discussion.

Discussion (23 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

brianolson•about 1 hour ago

> Why aren’t these AI companies submitting to the TOP500 to show off their computing prowess?

my knowledge is 10+ years out of date, but once upon a time if they'd chosen to, Google could have had _several_ entries in the top 10 of the TOP500 list

It's just poker, they didn't want to tip their hand

ziofill•35 minutes ago

Also, would those 550k Blackwell have good FP64 performance? How would one even compare them?

iberator•about 1 hour ago

Cloud computing is not a supercomputer. Different architecture, bandwitch, interconnectivity and latencies.

dgacmu•about 1 hour ago

That's not nearly as true when you look at AI training clusters. They're basically supercomputers but without an FP64 focus.

(These are the systems to which GP was referring at Google.)

cynicalkane•28 minutes ago

Even before AI training clusters became important, Google has had an outstanding custom fabric (there's papers about it) together with the ability to tune NICs for their own cases, and "their own cases" meant nearly everything engineered within Google. Ethernet hardware has had low kernel latency and DMA for a long time; it's the rest of the stack that hurts. But as far back as the early 2010s (if not further back, that goes beyond my knowledge horizon), you could just make it not hurt, if you had the software engineers to do it.

jeffbee•32 minutes ago

I thought TPUs couldn't reasonably run LINPACK at all because TPUs do not acknowledge that FP64 exists.

I know Google wants to compare their stuff to El Capitan or whatever but the comparison does not seem valid to me.

wmf•33 minutes ago

Historically there have been a bunch of clusters on the Top 500 that weren't used for HPC. The tell is that they used Ethernet (this was before RoCE). It's less efficient but you can still get an OK Linpack score.

jandrewrogers•about 1 hour ago

TOP500 hasn't been a particularly useful measure of practical computing power in modern systems for many years because what it measures isn't a significant bottleneck in most real systems. It has become a measure of how much money someone is willing to spend for bragging rights. (HPCG is better in that it is a bit more bandwidth focused but still pretty narrow.)

Most companies with huge systems don't participate.

bee_rider•20 minutes ago

I wonder if there would have been an opportunity to generate some finer-grained benchmarks with something like BiCGStab+ILU (or maybe CG+incomplete cholesky). Instead of CG+Gauss Seidel. The pitch being, you might have made different memory vs compute trade-offs with designing your cluster, but you should be able to select a fill-in factor for the preconditioner to suit it.

flopsamjetsam•44 minutes ago

> We think it is highly likely that these LX2 chiplets are etched using SMIC 7 nanometer processes at the N+3 refinement, and we base that on the fact that the chip only runs at 1.55 GHz. That is nowhere near the 3 GHz that SMIC can push with that process, but it is probably lower to get the memory and core speeds more balanced. [1]

Based on the ARMv9.2.

[1] https://www.nextplatform.com/hpc/2026/06/25/a-deep-dive-on-c...

amelius•13 minutes ago

How many tokens/s? :)

ziofill•about 1 hour ago

> Two cores are disabled per cluster.

I’m sure there is a good reason for this, which is..?

brianolson•10 minutes ago

Yield. Some fraction of cores had a speck of dust or something, but at 38/40 good cores per chip they got economical yield

jandrewrogers•40 minutes ago

It is likely that those cores are dedicated to unrelated management, monitoring, and administrative tasks. This is common and many workloads are throttled on bandwidth anyway. For the purposes of the benchmark, those cores are not participating in the workload.

2OEH8eoCRo0•about 2 hours ago

Extremely impressive accomplishment considering they did this with Chinese interconnects and Chinese chips. This is a wake up call.

jandrewrogers•about 1 hour ago

TOP500 can be done with inexpensive silicon. It is more about a willingness to aggregate enough hardware in one place. As a benchmark, it tells you almost nothing about computing power or scalability for other applications because it doesn't exercise the bottlenecks most high-scale applications have.

echelon•about 1 hour ago

We're too busy regulating the tech, not granting access to US engineers and companies, arguing against power and data centers, stopping skilled immigration.

This is absolutely going to bite us in the face in five to ten years.

2OEH8eoCRo0•about 1 hour ago

Separate issue that has nothing to do with US manufacturing or HPC. I think our retreat from science funding and offshoring advanced manufacturing is a bigger issue.

dgellow•about 1 hour ago

Just glad to see Hamburg mentioned :) Hope you all didn’t suffer too much through the current heatwave

lokimedes•about 2 hours ago

Would the AI “GW-scale” clusters be able to run the Top500 benchmarks meaningfully? And what might be the outcome?

wmf•31 minutes ago

Yes, they should score well on Linpack as long as they use Ozaki emulation.

rippeltippel•about 2 hours ago

Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48658334

techsystems•about 2 hours ago

Is it the first to reach 2 exaflops?