3 ms·

I was coming here to say: "Windows has an insignificant (actually 0% for a few years) market in top500. It is not a good benchmark for a processor with such a b

I was coming here to say: "Windows has an insignificant (actually 0% for a few years) market in top500. It is not a good benchmark for a processor with such a big number of cores.". Then was surprised to see that it was run in CentOS. It is a shame that many sites didn't behaved like this when Threadripper was launched and basically said that the architecture was inefficient at using so many cores or the software simply was not ready yet. Phoronix was one of the few which did it right.

pjmlp 5y ago
Azure is the new darling "OS" for Microsoft, we are back into the mainframe/UNIX server days anyway. Besides third party distributions, Microsoft now has three flavours of their own as well. Azure Sphere OS, CBL-Mariner, then their Android flavours (althought it isn't really Linux) and RTOS like Azure RTOS. Still owns the desktop, but since the internal political wars for the ultimate GUI framework started, I have started to doubt where it will all end.
- marcodiego 5y ago
  > the internal political wars for the ultimate GUI framework started Any more info about this?
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Easy, Windows Forms, WPF, WinRT/UAP/UWP with WinUI 2.x, WinUI 3.0 for desktop, Blazor for WebAssembly, but also for web widgets in MAUI, and MAUI naturally. Then in what concerns XAML, MAUI uses the one from Xamarin, instead of adopting the one from WinUI/UWP. WinUI 3.0 is supposed to be the future, but has so many bugs and missing features, that Windows 11 is actually using WinUI 2.7 with UWP still. All of those UIs catering for developer attention, makeing their point why their framework and not the one from another group. Safest bets now are to stay with Win32, Forms/WPF or go Web.
    - marcodiego 5y ago
      Hmmm... I know. Thought it was a new war.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chrisseaton 5y ago
Like any major tech company, Microsoft runs a lot of Linux installations. Just because it's Microsoft doesn't mean all they care about is Windows.
- hulitu 5y ago
  After all "linux is communism" and " linux is a cancer" they are very happy with the communist cancer. Makes you wonder.
wmf 5y ago
Very few people will switch from Windows to Linux for any reason, so it's fair to benchmark Threadripper on Windows for customers who are already tied to Windows.
adfgaertyqer 5y ago
>It is a shame that many sites didn't behaved like this when Threadripper was launched and basically said that the architecture was inefficient at using so many cores or the software simply was not ready yet. Phoronix was one of the few which did it right. I found it jaw-dropping how badly Microsoft handled that release. In some cases, the best way to improve multithreaded performance under Windows was to disable three quarters of the cores. Meanwhile any decent Linux distro scaled to the full core count out of the box. I wonder to what extent this is holding back computer architecture. Certainly the Wintel cartel has historically back competition from other architectures, but even within x86-land we can see the monopoly power and technical inadequacy of Windows holding back innovation. Linux supports every architecture known to man. Microsoft pretty much only supports x86. They have no excuse.
- atdrummond 5y ago
  This narrative doesn’t jive with the Windows NT development history and its support for Alpha, PowerPC, etc. As well as Windows CE historical range of processor support.
  - marcodiego 5y ago
    It is a common view that the "wintel" architecture "monopoly" sucked investment that could feed other more efficient architectures than x86. It is known that NT supported many different architectures, mostly thanks to its VMS heritage, and CE supported POWER and even ARM. But as soon as the desktop became the strongest cash cow, I think other options were kept mostly as lifeboat options.
- blacksmith_tb 5y ago
  There are plenty of reasons to be critical of MS, but they sell a lot of ARM machines these days...[1] 1: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/business/surface-pro-x/processor https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/business/surface-pro...
  - hulitu 5y ago

pjmlp 5y ago

Azure is the new darling "OS" for Microsoft, we are back into the mainframe/UNIX server days anyway. Besides third party distributions, Microsoft now has three flavours of their own as well. Azure Sphere OS, CBL-Mariner, then their Android flavours (althought it isn't really Linux) and RTOS like Azure RTOS. Still owns the desktop, but since the internal political wars for the ultimate GUI framework started, I have started to doubt where it will all end.

marcodiego 5y ago
> the internal political wars for the ultimate GUI framework started Any more info about this?
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Easy, Windows Forms, WPF, WinRT/UAP/UWP with WinUI 2.x, WinUI 3.0 for desktop, Blazor for WebAssembly, but also for web widgets in MAUI, and MAUI naturally. Then in what concerns XAML, MAUI uses the one from Xamarin, instead of adopting the one from WinUI/UWP. WinUI 3.0 is supposed to be the future, but has so many bugs and missing features, that Windows 11 is actually using WinUI 2.7 with UWP still. All of those UIs catering for developer attention, makeing their point why their framework and not the one from another group. Safest bets now are to stay with Win32, Forms/WPF or go Web.
  - marcodiego 5y ago
    Hmmm... I know. Thought it was a new war.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

chrisseaton 5y ago

Like any major tech company, Microsoft runs a lot of Linux installations. Just because it's Microsoft doesn't mean all they care about is Windows.

hulitu 5y ago
After all "linux is communism" and " linux is a cancer" they are very happy with the communist cancer. Makes you wonder.

wmf 5y ago

Very few people will switch from Windows to Linux for any reason, so it's fair to benchmark Threadripper on Windows for customers who are already tied to Windows.

adfgaertyqer 5y ago

>It is a shame that many sites didn't behaved like this when Threadripper was launched and basically said that the architecture was inefficient at using so many cores or the software simply was not ready yet. Phoronix was one of the few which did it right. I found it jaw-dropping how badly Microsoft handled that release. In some cases, the best way to improve multithreaded performance under Windows was to disable three quarters of the cores. Meanwhile any decent Linux distro scaled to the full core count out of the box. I wonder to what extent this is holding back computer architecture. Certainly the Wintel cartel has historically back competition from other architectures, but even within x86-land we can see the monopoly power and technical inadequacy of Windows holding back innovation. Linux supports every architecture known to man. Microsoft pretty much only supports x86. They have no excuse.

atdrummond 5y ago
This narrative doesn’t jive with the Windows NT development history and its support for Alpha, PowerPC, etc. As well as Windows CE historical range of processor support.
- marcodiego 5y ago
  It is a common view that the "wintel" architecture "monopoly" sucked investment that could feed other more efficient architectures than x86. It is known that NT supported many different architectures, mostly thanks to its VMS heritage, and CE supported POWER and even ARM. But as soon as the desktop became the strongest cash cow, I think other options were kept mostly as lifeboat options.
blacksmith_tb 5y ago
There are plenty of reasons to be critical of MS, but they sell a lot of ARM machines these days...[1] 1: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/business/surface-pro-x/processor https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/business/surface-pro...
- hulitu 5y ago