"Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-951D4A.23044524072008@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net... > In article <e606c$4888bb6a$15704@news.teranews.com>, > "Crab Apple" <crab@pple.com> wrote: > >> "Alan Baker" <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote in message >> news:alangbaker-866ED3.09381724072008@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net... >> > In article <6a718$4888aaf3$30065@news.teranews.com>, >> > "Crab Apple" <crab@pple.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Kirby" <KG@songbrd.biz> wrote in message >> >> news:KG-C0BD83.22154421072008@comcast.dca.giganews.com... >> >> > http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsI >> >> > d=2 >> >> > 00807 >> >> > 21005368&newsLang=en >> >> > >> >> > Virginia Tech Deploys the First 40Gb/s InfiniBand Large-Scale >> >> > Compute >> >> > Systems >> >> > Based on Mellanox Interconnect >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > " The new system consists of 324 Apple Mac Pro Servers with the >> >> > total >> >> > of >> >> > 2592 >> >> > CPU cores efficiently connected with ConnectX 40Gb/s InfiniBand >> >> > adapters >> >> > and >> >> > InfiniScale IV switches, and 40Gb/s copper cables from Amphenol and >> >> > W.L. >> >> > Gore & >> >> > Associates. The systemÕs performance is ranked among the Top 100 >> >> > systems >> >> > of the >> >> > June 2008 Top500 list of supercomputers." >> >> >> >> The Virginia Tech system is number 280 on the list of top 500. >> >> >> >> http://www.top500.org/list/2008/06/300 >> >> >> >> Perhaps you can explain how they can be ranked at 280 yet still be in >> >> the >> >> top 100? >> >> >> >> Thanks in advance. >> > >> > Did you fail to read the words "the new system consists of 324 Apple >> > Mac >> > Pro Servers"? >> >> Did you fail to read the words "The systemÕs performance is ranked among >> the Top 100 systems of the June 2008 Top500 list of supercomputers?" > > Yes. And that means the *performance* of the system is such that it > would be in the top 100.
According to whom? Not the people who run the Top 500 list. It doesn't appear there.
>> >> > The system you've shown at 280 is the one based on 1100 xServes. >> >> It's the only one on the Top 500 list for June 2008. If they changed >> the >> system, it's not rated at the Top 500 site for June 2008. > > They didn't *change* the system, Edwin. They added a system
Who cares if it's a replacement system or an additional system? Their new system is not ranked in the top 100 for June 2008. The story is false.
> and they > didn't claim that the *system* was rated yet.
"The systemÕs performance is ranked among the Top 100 systems of the June 2008 Top500 list of supercomputers."
Maybe you'll read it if I repeat it for you enough times.
>> >> > Bravo, Edwin: You wrong... >> >> I am correct about what my link says. > > You're just incorrect that it had anything to do with the system > mentioned.
I said Virginia Tech is 280 on the list, not in the top 100. So I'm not incorrect at all. They're not in the top 100 no matter which of their systems you talk about.
>> >> > ...again! >> >> So how could I be wrong about that again when I haven't been wrong about >> it >> once? > > LOL
No answer from Mr. You_May_Now_Answer_the_Question?
