🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov16.212703.4519@nas.nasa.gov>, fineberg@win31.nas.nasa.gov (Samuel A. Fineberg) writes:
|> In article <1e8tm6INN61f@early-bird.think.com>, ephraim@think.com (Ephraim Vishniac) writes:
|> |> In article <1992Nov16.174414.12427@craycos.com> jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies) writes:
|> |> >Actually, even the $250,000/GFLOP number sounds a bit low to me; $2M/GFLOP
|> |> >is closer to the current going rate.
|> |> 
|> |> I don't know what Cray's prices are, but $250K/GFLOP is the ballpark
|> |> figure for the CM-5. 
|> |> 
|> |> -- 
|> |> Ephraim Vishniac    ephraim@think.com   ThinkingCorp@applelink.apple.com
|> |>  Thinking Machines Corporation / 245 First Street / Cambridge, MA 02142
|> |>         One of the flaws in the anarchic bopper society was
|> |>         the ease with which such crazed rumors could spread.
|> Only if you mean peak.  And if you think a CM-5 can deliver $250K/GFLOP on
|> real application code, I have a bridge over the San Fancisco bay you might 
|> be interested in.

A curiosity question. When TMC sells people a CM-5, do they say it will do 1
GFLOP per $250K, or do they actually note that this performance is only
approached by heinously parallel code. (i.e. Are they trying to sell the CM-5
as a general purpose supercomputer?)

Jason W. Solinsky