You know what this guy hits the nail right on the head and as a programmer I'm inclined to agree with him.
Trying to do multicore programming with the use of how Threading works is somewhat annoying to me, and I rarely see a lot of speed up, at least what I think I should see. If the OS were more efficient at handling threading whether it be on a per program or per task it would be a glorious day. I also happen to love the idea of rewriting windows from the ground up, everyone and there mother has been asking for this since 2000, but its nothing but rehash after rehash...I mean why are we paying 200 bucks every 3-4 years for the same ole crap just a different flavor???
It's not custom unless your the only one who can boot it.
I agree from a user standpoint dizowned. My processor is of course a dual core, and I guess it operates OK. I also was doing some research on things this weekend, and figured out that I can prioritize specifically some programs to a core. So I guess that would be more efficient, with a Dual core cpu it is not as big of a thing though as it would be to what coming onto the market.
Intel's new six core CPU is amazing to me, and from what I understand we may have eight core processors by the end of this year. So this seems to be all on the software providers to me. The hardware is there, but in general at least in many cases the software either see's a rudimentary increase in operational power.
I think if the software knew by default how to manage a CPU, or at least gave you open options on install or something it would be better considerably than it is now.
Maybe since you are a programmer you can explain this holding back of the software industry from direct usage of the hardware that is now common?
The way I understood it was say on a quad core processor (core 1 handles Gaming), (core 2 handles ripping a DVD), (Core 3 handles virus scan), and( core 4 encodes a DVD). Now this is worst case scenario of taxing a processor but I though each core handled its given task to the best of its ability. I agree the problem seems to lie in the coding as programs are not optimized properly, games included.
I'm not a programmer, but I read this article a a while back. I know it is an old article but it might still apply today. Even though this article is about games, it should be no different from other software.
This has always been an issue with the multi core processors.
Some of my DCC programs are able to take advantage of these CPU's. Yet it kinda turns out to be a Plug and Pray aspect of using these.
I would hope that if anything, they would come out with a program that allows us to utilize these across all platforms.
That is why I have been waiting for the 8cores. Because I would like them to use all 8, inside the programs when you go to render scenes. Yet it kinda seems like it uses them whenever they feel like it.
As a programmer, I wholeheartedly agree with you. Multi-threaded programming is a pretty tricky beast. It isn't just a matter of 'splitting things up' - it's a matter of splitting things up, still having them be able to talk to each other, and not having the whole program go down in a horrible deadlocked situation (which is surprisingly easy to do, yet tricky to spot). Perhaps it just comes down to us programmers being better trained at this sort of thing.
I think it should be very interesting to see how Id's Rage engine handles this. From my understanding of the architecture, it is meant to scale very well for multiple cores/threads.
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2014 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms