3 ms·
It's highly task dependent, making the "theory" pretty useless, no? Hell, we could even say it's multi-task dependent as any real, deployed system won't be try
by ivankirigin 19y ago
It's highly task dependent, making the "theory" pretty useless, no?
Hell, we could even say it's multi-task dependent as any real, deployed system won't be trying to complete a single task.
- rms 19y agoSo theory aside, multi-core processors should be good for at least 20 years? And that's if we don't come up with anything better.
- ivankirigin 19y agoWhat do you mean by "should be good"? Things can still improve if the hardware configuration remains the same. And I have no idea how long the trend for increased horsepower will continue. My hope with my comment was to get away from prognostication and reducing a problem to a simple number. But perhaps one take away is that we should use a suite of real programs to test hardware configurations. Benchmark routines are pretty useless when hardware optimizes for the routine, which has obviously been happening for years. A seti-at-home style system that noted top and your system configuration would be useful. Deploy it to a few hundred computers and see how things perform in the aggregate with increasing quality hardware.