Re: Important question to all Euphoria users
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> Vincent wrote:
> >
> > It's not that I or anyone else wants to worry about concurrency, it's
> > the fact these CPU developers/manufacturers are forcing it upon us with
> > their
> > extreme efforts at improving CPU performance. For the past 30 years, CPU
> > families
> > have been improved by decreasing circuitry size, increasing transitor count,
> > and increasing clock frequency. However Moore's Law is finally starting to
> > impose
> > it's limits on that philosophy, so processor manufacturers are having to
> > come
> > up with new ways to extend the law a bit longer.
>
> I think you misunderstood my question. If you're doing lots of number
> crunching, for instance, then you can perhaps benefit from a multi-core
> architecture (e.g., SETI at home, etc). Possibly some sort of graphics
> intensive application that requires lots of calculations. But not most
> of the stuff that most people write. Multiple cores probably aren't going
> to give you much if you're doing lots of disk I/O, for instance. Or if
> your app sits around waiting for user input.
>
> I understand that the raw speed of processors has stalled, and that the
> conventional wisdom is that we'll get multi-cored processors. And that's
> probably a big bonus when you consider a system as a whole, where you're
> doing multiple things simultaneously, but conventional wisdom also says
> that most apps won't benefit from this in the same way that they have
> from faster chips.
Almost any class of application can benefit from this to some extent, but of
course the more CPU intensive applications will have the most impact; that has
always been the case and will continue to be.
Faster clock frequency means more instructions can be processed and sent back to
memory in a given period of time. Multiple core, superscalar processors running
programs designed for parallization, can process more than a few instructions per
cycle. The result is multi-core processors can do more in less time, or the same
at slower clock speeds than regular processors.
> So. I'm genuinely curious what you (and anyone else with an interesting
> answer) would do with this multi-cored machine that would be so much
> better that what we have now.
>
> Matt Lewis
You mean if I had money to buy one? :P
Well... I would do some intense gaming, 3D modeling, digital graphic
design/photo editing, and write libraries for Euphoria. Perhaps I would
do all this while converting a 4 GB movie to DivX, SVCD, or VCD and while
ripping music from a CD to my harddisk.
Most people wont have any trouble taking their machines to the extreme. 
Regards,
Vincent
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
