3 ms·
I didn’t say that the OS refuses to utilize cores. But I’ve seen examples of embarrassingly parallel tasks that utilize 80% of the cpu to run faster on CPUs wit
by elorant 3y ago
I didn’t say that the OS refuses to utilize cores. But I’ve seen examples of embarrassingly parallel tasks that utilize 80% of the cpu to run faster on CPUs with only performance cores when compares to hybrids with the same number of threads. There might be some other reason for that, but my gut feeling is to stick with all performance designs.
- wtallis 3y ago> I’ve seen examples of embarrassingly parallel tasks that utilize 80% of the cpu to run faster on CPUs with only performance cores when compares to hybrids with the same number of threads The "same number of threads" bit is throwing me off. A hybrid config will generally have more CPU cores allowing it to handle more threads for a chip of the same size, so testing with a fixed thread count can only tell you that the performance of each small core is less than the performance of a large core. But maybe the examples you have in mind are complicated by SMT/HyperThreading (which Intel has on P cores but not E cores, while AMD has it on both)?
- elorant 3y agoI only mention threads because it's the only way to draw comparisons between dissimilar cpus.
- wtallis 3y agoYou already specified that we're discussing embarrassingly parallel tasks, so putting a constraint on thread count is of no use here. We can compare on the basis of performance, power and die size.