5 ms·
If you look at single-threaded processor benchmarks, CPUs are still getting faster. The new i9's are 20% faster than the next-fastest chips. It's definitely not
by ______-_-______ 5y ago
If you look at single-threaded processor benchmarks, CPUs are still getting faster. The new i9's are 20% faster than the next-fastest chips. It's definitely not doubling every two years but it's still noticeable.
https://valid.x86.fr/bench/1 https://valid.x86.fr/bench/1
Can you explain how to square that with the link saying compressing data hasn't gotten any faster since 2005?
- throwaway81523 5y ago> Can you explain how to square that with the link saying compressing data hasn't gotten any faster since 2005? Compression may be bottlenecked by ram (L2 or L3 cache) access speed, or maybe even dram (main memory) access speed.
- gallabytes 5y agoThat wouldn't make sense - compression has very cache-friendly access patterns, and would benefit greatly from the observed improvements in memory bandwidth.
- throwaway81523 5y agoThat surprises me to hear. I would expect it to jump around in ram a lot. And at higher compression settings, some compressors use a lot of ram, more than will fit in cache.
- ______-_-______ 5y agoI have an i7-3770k and an i9-12900k sitting here. Do you know of a benchmark I could run myself that would give me the same results on both CPUs?
- formerly_proven 5y agosleep 1?
- gallabytes 5y agoSIMD - compressing has gotten faster, but (assuming OP is correct rather than just missing info) the reference algorithm didn't have room to take advantage of SIMD. The relevant improvements since 2010 or so mostly look like bandwidth improvements not latency, and coincide with increasing ubiquity of SIMD instructions and SIMD-friendly algorithms.