Automatically constructing and animating your face
How could that be potentially detrimental in any way?
Nvidia on Monday launched its first ever virtual GPU Technology Conference, taking place online over the course of this week across multiple timezones. The coronavirus pandemic forced the graphics processor giant to cancel its in-person tech event normally held in Silicon Valley. Although the location of the conference this …
"The next SuperPOD project is the Cambridge-1 behemoth, planned to be Britain's most powerful publicly known supercomputer"
"ARCHER2 will have a peak performance estimated at 28 x 10**15 FLOP/s" (https://epsrc.ukri.org/blog/supercomputers-how-archer2-will-increase-the-pace-and-productivity-of-research/#:~:text=ARCHER2%20will%20have%20a%20peak,than%20the%201964%20Cray%20supercomputer.)
vs "eight petaflops of Linpack benchmark performance" (your article).
So Archer 2 is 3.5x more powerful on a the disliked, but standard, measure of HPC machine performance. (And, Archer 2 is "publicly known")
TBH I don't care how much AI power it has. There is a well defined measure of High Performance Computing performance (which we hate, but there it is), and if you claim to be "Britain's most powerful publicly known supercomputer", and then quote a position on the Top500 and a Linpack performance number then you are explicitly using that definition. (Which, here, does not support the claim of being the UK's top machine).
If you want to compare "AI power", then that's fine, you;'re very welcome to do that, but whatever you claim there is not comparable with any measure used to evaluate and rate the top supercomputers.
If there was an "AI500" list and recognised AI benchmark to use to rate machines then claiming a position in that is fine. But the claim that performance on FP16 (or BFP16) is comparable with double-precision Linpack is just wrong.
Or, if you prefer: you are absolutely right, NVIDIA is making an apples to tangerines comparison, and that is what I am objecting to!