4 ms·
Even crazier, my i5 750 (from 2009) was overclocked to 3.5ghz and per core Ryzen 3 isn't even twice as fast. We're near the end of IPC scaling per core. And it
by deviledeggs 5y ago
Even crazier, my i5 750 (from 2009) was overclocked to 3.5ghz and per core Ryzen 3 isn't even twice as fast.
We're near the end of IPC scaling per core. And it was never that good in the first place. Pentium 3 IPC is only 3-4x worse than the fastest Ryzen. Most of our speed increases came from frequency.
IMO we need to get off silicon substrate so we can frequency scale again.
I wonder if the end of scaling will push everyone into faster languages like Rust. You can't sit around 2 years for your code performance to double anymore. Will this eventually kill slow languages? I think so.
- michaelmrose 5y agoHardware increases of speed began to slow down 20 years ago and people are still using software that is 50x slower than the fastest possible technology. If this alone was going to kill slow languages one would suppose it would have already done so. The arguable shift that is more significant is not about hardware its hopefully about newer languages like Rust making this performance cost less in terms of safety and development time which is a more recent development.
- deviledeggs 5y agoI agree partially. But excuses for using dog slow languages, at least where I've worked, revolved around "it will be twice as fast in two years anyways" It's clear that's no longer true, which gives less excuses for using say Ruby over Java.