Quote:
Originally Posted by tuanming
Sure it is useless; it useless because we have useless programmers.
No, they don't have to be and 8 cores is even out yet... Simply put, if you have no use for "multi-core" processor then don't buy it, end of story. Don't judge a processor when it is not even on the market, unless you have a grudge against it  |
Dual quad xeons are 8-core setups...
And it's true programmers were taught with everything in mind. The implementation is another thing. What sucks so much is not that coders are not skilled enough, but rather, they (the processor manufacturers) made it harder for us. Which also explains why most current coders suck at making multithreaded apps. They don't suck because of their skills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonvibes
it seems here we have a contradictory ideas.
first someone mentions that there are no applications that take advantage from 4-8 cores.
then later when someone mentions there are apps that take advantage of 4-8 cores, and they're called "un-optimized."
|
But they are. Only a lazy coder would thread things out and try to sync them up in hope of gaining some performance. And well... he DOES gain some performance boost, but the application should be written so that it squeezes out as least resources as possible. A programmer's goal is not to stress hardware to their most extremes.
Quote:
|
if you had the choice between a 2-cored processor @ 4ghz, and a 8-cored processor @ 4ghz, you'd be a fool to choose the 2-cored processor.
|
Realistically, we have no choice, though. That aside, I'd still choose 2-core @ 4GHz over 4-core @ 4GHz. Why? The latter is hotter... always.
Quote:
|
and the faster we get 8-cored processors on the market, the faster coders can start experimenting with the benefits of the extra cores.
|
Cell BE on the PS3 is more interesting to mess with than a Core 2 with more cores. Seriously.