Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lets use my Cinebench screenshot as an example of multi threaded application vs single threaded application. If you were to render that image using a single core with the same level of performance, you would need a processor running at a speed that is never going to happen on silicon technology. We're at the limits, and both makes of processor offer impressive single threaded performance - In the real world there's very little between them.
We have no choice but to overcome the current scheduler issues and begin splitting applications into threads if we want to continue to ramp speeds faster. As shown in my example regarding Doom 2016, game developers are already beginning to apply such logic to games using modern API's/engines. Something that really wasn't possible regarding older versions of DirectX/OGL.
Lets use my Cinebench screenshot as an example of multi threaded application vs single threaded application.
This is a really bad idea- that type of rendering is about as close as you're going to get to a real-world infinitely parallelizable workload. As in, there's very little branching logic, and work like that should really be done on specialized hardware i.e. SSE, AVX, GPUs.
That benchmark exists solely to provide a real-world workload that runs float code.
What we're talking about with single thread performance is code that is branching and has dependency chains where the workload cannot be logically done in parallel. Game logic is one example and is accessible, which is why we're talking about it relative to the 9900KS.
Exactly...lolI haven't had a ten minute bootup on a computer since the IMSAI 8080.
Your biggest problem with mechanical HDD's and performance in most scenarios is NTFS and the NT kernel - Both are overdue for retirement. It's also one of the biggest problems with multi threaded application for most.
Remember, you said I could discuss it.
No, even a supercomputer would be slow with a single HDD in loading and storing data into memory.
A single HDD is far more than a bottleneck on even low power and embedded systems at this point, let alone a workstation with a powerful CPU.
Also, you can totally discuss it here.
Once the data has been loaded from the HDD into RAM, the "experience" can be fast; it is the wait-time for the data to move from the HDD to RAM that is abysmal.
2TB and lower, HDDs are completely obsolete, even at cost.
For 3TB and above, HDDs are still good at storage, but not for OS and day-to-day usage, let alone databases or enterprise outside of WORM media.
No one is saying IPC isn't important. But it's a fact that IPC is at it limits.I feel you think I’m saying everything should be single threaded. That’s not at all what I’m saying. I am saying that per-thread performance is still quite important, and improvements are absolutely the focus of quite a lot of research spending.
This is complimentary to having more cores, improving schedulers, and increasing parallelism in software, not contradictory.
Something is seriously wrong if your 8080 and 8" FDD (or HDD) was taking 10 minutes to boot.I haven't had a ten minute bootup on a computer since the IMSAI 8080.
Not of I get to it first!Do you still have the IMSAI? I'll make you an offer!
I don't think they are going to get it. Literally it was only two years ago when people thought 4 cores were enough. 6 cores is now the sweet spot. In another year 8 cores will be standard.And yet while Cinebench's utilization is, naturally, better - It's implementation is literally identical to my Doom 2016 example. Furthermore, as stated, I'm getting great performance in a CPU limited scenario at a speed well under 4Ghz.
People are missing the point - There's no point arguing that single core performance is still paramount when it's obvious it's not going to scale much faster than it's currently at due to the limitations of the technology used.
Not of I get to it first!
Oh good, here you are again claiming that hard drives run fast under linux and slow under windows but, hard drives are slow, period, regardless of the OS or file system.
Something is seriously wrong if your 8080 and 8" FDD (or HDD) was taking 10 minutes to boot.
Those normally booted within 10-15 seconds, absolute max after full checks and booting CP/M or any other OS.
Yeah I used to get my win98se k6-2 382mhz laptop with a 4200rpm? spinner boot in 26 secs with serious tweaking of Windows and crapware junk clearing..I haven't had a ten minute bootup on a computer since the IMSAI 8080.
Ok, that is a valid point.Cassette would be a different scenario however, mind you I don't think anyone booted CP/M off cassette?
AFAIK Zen3 will be the last iteration on the current socket Mazzspeed
And yet while Cinebench's utilization is, naturally, better - It's implementation is literally identical to my Doom 2016 example.
Furthermore, as stated, I'm getting great performance in a CPU limited scenario at a speed well under 4Ghz.
Ohhh, competition! ;D
Actually, you were the only one here mentioning Linux. I was just quoting the facts. Once again, do you seriously have to turn everything into an us vs them argument? Can we just discuss the facts like mature technically savvy adults?
I've got nothing against you ManOdGod, but this seriously has to stop.
Meh, bugger! Perhaps I'll hold off just a little while longer.
Cheers for the reply.
RDR2 shows that if you code highly threaded games this is not the case since trying to chase high fps the 9700k and the 9600k end up screwing themselves up and creating a stuttering mess, forcing you to cap the frames until it's low enough for those non HT cpu to handle (and this is only the latest game to show that, someone has mentioned already that FC 5 had similar performance quirks/bias against these cpus)
So, poorly coded same as in farcry 5, right... It isn't that it is overly aggressive behavior hmmhmm if you wanna believe that, do so, your choice.
That's two totally different game engines btw. And I explained what could be the cause, if the processor micro code is too aggressive with predictions/cache a miss can mean that it has to go all the way back to system ram for the data it should have had at hand but didn't.
I wonder going forward how many "bugged" game engines will show similar patterns.
So, poorly coded same as in farcry 5, right... It isn't that it is overly aggressive behavior hmmhmm if you wanna believe that, do so, your choice.
That's two totally different game engines btw. And I explained what could be the cause, if the processor micro code is too aggressive with predictions/cache a miss can mean that it has to go all the way back to system ram for the data it should have had at hand but didn't.
I wonder going forward how many "bugged" game engines will show similar patterns.
Yeah, the NT kernel is shit compared to other OS kernels, especially with thread scheduling and threads jumping all over the damn place.Nah, I was just basing my point off of what you said in the past, which I should have pointed out in my post but missed that, it happens. Also, there is nothing wrong with the NT kernel, it has been improved upon over the years and is not what you had back in the NT 3.1 days. Also, NTFS does not need to be replaced, either, since it has also been improved upon since its original release as well.
Why hold off, we are talking the X370, X470, X570 and I would imagine for Zen3, the X670. The only reason you would not be able to use the 3950X in that is if DDR5 is released with it.
Something is seriously wrong if your 8080 and 8" FDD (or HDD) was taking 10 minutes to boot.
Those normally booted within 10-15 seconds, absolute max after full checks and booting CP/M or any other OS.
Not of I get to it first!