Have you seen this?

I would say a hash is more like in the low 4 digits (thousand(s)) of ops, just seeing the code. Definitely not 5 or anything similar.

Hashing is mostly elementary integer ops like bit shifts, and are hardly as meaty as floating point ops. Here might be a helpful relation though:  for each cluster of 5 alus on a 5970, four mainly do integer ops and simple float ops, and the fifth can do both integer and full floating point including transcendentals (sin,cos,log,exp,etc.) So in the context of 5970s, integer ops and flops may be different.  But by no more than a ratio of 5 to 1.

I lost you at 2858*2~=6700 (correct answer 5716, closer to your 5800, simple typo?)

How about another way to measure, based on the total capacity of the hardware even if we're not using all of its floating point capabilities for mining.  Assuming entire network is 5970s, even though in reality, it's probably much or most of the network.

Published FLOPS for 5970: 4640G (FLOPS/5970)
Hashrate of 5970 (stock): 580M ((hash/s)/5970)
Network hashrate: 450G (hash/s)

Total 5970s:  450G (hash/s) (580M ((hash/s)/5970) = 775.86 (5970)

Total network FLOPS based on total 5970s: 4640G (FLOPS/5970) * 775.86 (5970) = 3.6PFLOPS

The number might not mean a whole lot - other than how many FLOPS are available if suddenly the supercomputing power of all miners could be bought and redirected to some other purpose.

It might be a sanity check for the higher figure - if my figures are right, the idea that the Bitcoin network has more total FLOPS than the sum of the published FLOPS of all the individual GPU's that make it up might garner some doubt.

Yeah, ours pays you 

Seriously though folding and all the others are pretty awesome.

The NSA has without a doubt the biggest integer machine(s) on the planet but their hash power is classified.

If you could get a peek at their electricity bill it maybe possible to get a conservative order of magnitude idea of hash power using 5970 type Hash/Watt ratios.

Order of magnitude is about right ... 30,000 GPU cores ... maybe knock some off for auxiliary device power consumption, cooling, lights, coffee maker.
I'd say 20-25K GPU cores puts them double anything else out there in total hardware cores which is a good feel for where the nuts 'n bolts bleeding edge is at, so yeah maybe 6-7 THash/sec.... sounds like a good factor of safety target for bitcoin network.

I'm so tired I didn't even notice 

I am wondering about the number of TeraFLOP/s reported on the http://bitcoinwatch.com/ page.  For example the number I see right now is 145906.

If this number is really in TeraFLOP/s then it is claiming 146 PetaFLOP/s!

That can't be right.  What do you think?  This number is larger than all the supercomuters and all other distributed computing projects put together.

I have an email into the page admin and will let you know how they respond.

So it is true.


I wonder how much electricity it is. Wait a second for the edit.

EDIT: So, assuming everyone is mining with 5970s, the most efficient, it would mean that we got a 2.3 Mhashes/joule -> 13,300,000 Mhashes/x -> 5,782,608 Joules

3.6 mJ = 1 kWh -> ~1.6 kWh?!!! I most be doing something wrong. D: Ok, it is 1.6 kWh per second. So s*m -> 3600 * 1.6 = 5,782 kWh.

Assuming 15 cents per kWh that is an expensive bill for just one block. D: