4 ms·

Same here, but son was too excited about 5950x, and wanted birthday/xmas gift, so you go. I'm geeking out, for the first time since I did my own upgrade from Ap

by malkia 6y ago

Same here, but son was too excited about 5950x, and wanted birthday/xmas gift, so you go. I'm geeking out, for the first time since I did my own upgrade from Apple ][ -> PC 286 -> PC 386SX -> Cyrix 6x86 - I wanted to skip Threadripper, as he normally works in single app - whether it's game (Fortnite, COD, Roblox, etc.) or video editing (Premiere, After Effects, others). The only issue is that we have older motherboard B440, but were notified that BIOS would update would be coming!

sidpatil 6y ago
> I wanted to skip Threadripper, as he normally works in single app I thought those types of applications would actually be able to take good advantage of all those cores.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- hnuser123456 6y ago
  16 cores ought to be plenty for the next few years.
- malkia 6y ago
  We've hit a performance problem with multi-socket setups (NUMA) - basically one core talking to the other's core memory (different sockets), hence slowdowns. And it's amplified by the use of atomics (shared_ptr, etc.). What we did was simply to disable one core (it was two CPU sockets). I guess for servers, executing many (mostly) single threaded jobs (a.k.a "borg", "kubernetes", "docker") is okay, but when you have app using all threads (TBB-style) then it becomes bottlenecked. SysInternal's https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/coreinfo https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/core... actually captures this detail (probably there are better apps, but it was nice to inspect machines quickly). The tool measure some relative slowdown.