Clusters allow one to leverage cheap commodity-grade computer hardware to generate massive amounts of computing power to accomplish the tasks which may typically be assigned to extremely high end computers and supercomputers.
Non traditional marketing is faster and efficient than traditional marketing.
Cluster computing can be described as a group of computers that work together in so many ways that they are essentially one large computer, rather than several separate ones. A group of computers working together in a cluster is able to do things not possible by a single member of the unit, while being less expensive and easily available than one supercomputer doing the same job.
Yes, a single-parent family is no better or worse than the traditional family.
NO
It is smaller in size and uses less energy than a traditional oven. This is better because it can help to lower your electrical costs.
The Roth IRA is not necessarily better per se than a traditional IRA. Whether one or the other is a better choice for you depends on current and expected marginal income.
A supercomputer using gallium arsenide instead of silicon for its semiconductor components. Gallium arsenide is much faster than silicon so it helps significantly in getting the performance needed by a supercomputer, but it is much harder to fabricate resulting in an increase in price.
It depends how you use the knowledge
Yes because they require more care, and are made better than traditional denture. Over time though you may wished you would have switched to traditional.
Considering the fact a Mac is often slower than a normal PC and a average super computer is roughly the speed of around 100 PCs. A supercomputer is an extremely large amount more powerful than a Mac.
Because it's incredibly secure, stable, fast, and proven to be efficient as server/supercomputer OS. It also has a better TCP/IP stack than windows.
The "supercomputers" come in different sizes; they make them larger every time. The whole point of a supercomputer is to process data quickly. If a lot of data is needed, most of it would probably be stored separately, in some database system. For example, the Babar database has about 900 Terabyte (that is, almost a Petabyte) of data stored; I don't now if there is an associated supercomputer, but I read something about 100 computers, with a total of 2000 processors, used to manage the database; I guess this cluster would qualify as a supercomputer. The situation is similar with Google, and similar online services. The data is shared among hundreds or thousands of computers, but since they work together, they would also qualify as a supercomputer. I would venture a guess that Google's database is larger than Babar's, but as far as I know, there is no published data on this particular point.