Scenario B
For this scenario, we assume that the federal HPCI program will change the direction of high-performance computing (HPC) development and utilization and the rate of HPC development and utilization.
Assumption 1. As in Scenario A, supercomputers are grouped into three classes in Scenario B:
• U.S.-made vector supercomputers,
• Japanese-made vector supercomputers, and
• parallel supercomputers.
Assumptions 2 and 3. We assume that demand for supercomputer systems of both the vector and parallel varieties will be increased by the HPCI program components concerned with the evaluation of early systems and high-performance computing research centers. All funding for early evaluation ($137 million over five years) will go toward the purchase of parallel supercomputers, whereas funding for research centers ($201 million over five years) will be used for U.S.-made vector and parallel supercomputers, tending more to the latter over time. We also assume that federal funding in these areas will precipitate increased state government expenditures, as well, although at lower levels. Although all of these systems would be installed in academic and government facilities (primarily the former), we also postulate in Scenario B that the
technology transfer components of HPCI would succeed in stimulating industrial demand for supercomputer systems. Here, the emphasis will be more on U.S.-made vector systems in the near term, although parallel systems will also gain popularity in the industrial sector in the late 1990s as a result of academic and government laboratory developmental efforts supported by HPCI.
Assumption 4. This increased demand and intensified development will also affect the price/performance of supercomputer systems. For U.S.-made vector systems, we conservatively assume that price/performance will improve one percentage point faster than the rates used in Scenario A. For parallel supercomputers, we assume that price/performance improvement will gradually approach levels typical of microprocessor chips and RISC technology (that is, 30+ per cent per year) by the year 2000.
Assumption 5. The increased R&D stimulated by HPCI should also result in significantly more powerful parallel supercomputers, namely, a TFLOPS system by about 1996. However, we do not assume any change in processing power for vector supercomputers, as compared with Scenario A, because we expect that HPCI will have little effect on hardware development for such systems. (This is distinct, however, from R&D into the use of and algorithms for vector systems, which definitely will be addressed by HPCI.)
Assumption 6. We assume that retirement rates for supercomputer systems of all types will be the same as in Scenario A.
As before, these assumptions are sufficient to generate a projection of supercomputer demand for the next 10 years:
• The number of installed supercomputers will approach 2200 systems by the year 2000. Table 5 shows how this installed base will be divided, as compared with Scenario A.
• Particularly noteworthy is the difference between these two scenarios in terms of U.S. standing relative to Japan. In Scenario A, Japan takes the lead in installed supercomputers, but in Scenario B, the U.S. retains the lead.
• Installed supercomputer power (measured in peak MFLOPS) will be increased by a factor of more then 300, to over 440 million MFLOPS, by the year 2000 (which is slightly less than the rate of growth in the 1980s). Of the MFLOPS installed in 2000, 96 per cent will be parallel supercomputers, one per cent will be U.S.-made vector supercomputers, and three per cent will be Japanese-made vector supercomputers.
|
• As shown in Table 6, the "average" vector supercomputer will increase about 10 times in processing power, whereas the "average" parallel system will increase nearly 125-fold over the decade. Average supercomputer price/performance will improve by a factor of 55.
• Annual revenues for vector supercomputers will peak at just over $3 billion in 1998. Revenues for parallel systems will continue to grow, surpassing those for vector systems by 1997 and exceeding $5 billion in 2000.
The differences between Scenarios A and B, as seen by the supercomputer industry, are as follows:
• 17 per cent more systems installed;
• almost three times as many peak MFLOPS shipped and two and one-half times as many MFLOPS installed in 2000;
• 39 per cent greater revenues in the year 2000—an $8 billion industry (Scenario B) as opposed to a $5 billion industry (Scenario A); and
• $10.4 billion more supercomputer revenues for the 1990–2000 decade.
In addition to these differences for supercomputers, HPCI would cause commensurate increases in revenues and usage for minisupercomputers, high-performance workstations, networks,
|
software, systems integration and management, etc. However, the largest payoff is expected to come from enhanced applications of high-performance computing.