4 ms·
> Single threaded programs are no faster on new computers, and most multi threaded programs dont scale well to many cores. There is also some progress - http:/
by nisa 11y ago
> Single threaded programs are no faster on new computers, and most multi threaded programs dont scale well to many cores.
There is also some progress - http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
I'm writing this on a Core2Duo E6750 that has a single thread score of 1000 - most new CPUs are at least twice as fast. Also Instructions per cycle going up.
It's really a hard problem. You can't just spawn threads and put mutexes in front of you data structures. This is terribly slow, even slower than single core without locking for some tasks.
We need better lockless data structures that minimize synchronisation.
- rasz_pl 11y agoThe best example to bring this idea home is $70(~$40 used) Pentium G3258 on ~$30 motherboard. It gets single thread score of 2400, so almost top of the chart. In single core games like World of Tanks (python ...) there is no differenve between this bottom of the barrel CPU and i7 *overclocked to 4.2
- Tepix 11y agoThe E6750 is a 2.66Ghz CPU that was introduced in Q3 2007. That means that single core performance went up only 8% per year on average. Compared to the improvements we made in the decades before that, that's really poor. I have a i7-2600k (quad core 3.4Ghz, 95W TDP, HT) that was introduced in 2011. Five years later, it still is not significantly slower than recent CPUs by Intel unless they take advantage of new CPU features. It sold for around 250€ back then. Today, for 250€ you can buy an i5-6600k (quad core 3.5Ghz, 91W TDP, no HT). The only big improvement in the i5-6600k is the GPU (which I don't use).