3 ms·
A lot of people question the usefulness of 64+ cores on a workstation CPU. It is true that audio/visual tools like Adobe After Effects stop benefiting from extr
by soygul 6y ago
A lot of people question the usefulness of 64+ cores on a workstation CPU. It is true that audio/visual tools like Adobe After Effects stop benefiting from extra cores at around 32 cores. [1]
But if you want to simulate production workloads on your machine say with Apache Spark or Flink, you are in the prime. You couple that CPU with 256+ GB memory, and you can start exploring the bottlenecks in your batch algorithms using as many cores as you want.
[1] https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-CPU-performance-AMD-Threadripper-3990X-64-Core-1658/ https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-CPU...
- cameron_b 6y agoI think we will be contending with this sort of barrier for a while on desktop software. 32 cores used to be massively parallel 10 years ago, 15 years ago it was nuts to think that we'd have that in a get-it-from-Newegg offering. Massively parallel operations take a different focus on your MPI/bus/queue architecture than we've ever needed for desktop software. BUT I think what we've already seen is that in general purpose computing there will always be someone ready to consume resources as they are available. Both feet don't move at the same time, one takes a step and then the other.