3 ms·
I was not trying to prove a point. It's just that giving a parallel speedup for a mostly CPU-bound task without mentioning the number of cores is not very inter
by ogrisel 11y ago
I was not trying to prove a point. It's just that giving a parallel speedup for a mostly CPU-bound task without mentioning the number of cores is not very interesting. 25x on 64 cores is not as interesting as 25x on 32 cores.
If you know the number of cores you get that the efficiency is 80% (w.r.t. linear scaling) which is very good.
- eis 11y agoBut it is explained exactly and in detail how many CPUs they used. They even show a graph that shows performance for different number of CPUs.
- ogrisel 11y agothe blog post is very good, my comment was just about adding the missing info to the HN post title. Edit the title of the HN post has changed since I made this comment... probably by being merged with an earlier submission of the same URL. Now I understand why HN readers are misinterpreting my comment. I did not intend to be negative.