Parallel Processors: What are they good for
-
I've always been interested in writing some really awesome parallel computing system using multiple cores on multiple machines on multiple network. Every time I spend time thinking of the solution and finding cool ways to make them work and overcome the intricacies... I always end up with not knowing what the problem for my solution is. What would you use this for? I mean, I know the obvious usage would be crunching large amounts of data for analysis for weather prediction or the like type stuff. These systems generally run on mainframe systems that are inherently multi core. Is that what we are talking about: Are these multi core systems always going to be servers. What would you really effectively do with 16 or more processors on a desktop PC? I can imagine that an application could make use of one or two of them at a time and that you could run multiple apps at the same time all performing perfectly. But is there really anything that we need to do on desktop computers today, that would really make use of a multi core system? Games would probably be able to make the best use of them. In short, I have a solution. but I need a problem to test it with. finding prime numbers is really just getting boring. What could this stuff be used for in real life? Gineer
-
I've always been interested in writing some really awesome parallel computing system using multiple cores on multiple machines on multiple network. Every time I spend time thinking of the solution and finding cool ways to make them work and overcome the intricacies... I always end up with not knowing what the problem for my solution is. What would you use this for? I mean, I know the obvious usage would be crunching large amounts of data for analysis for weather prediction or the like type stuff. These systems generally run on mainframe systems that are inherently multi core. Is that what we are talking about: Are these multi core systems always going to be servers. What would you really effectively do with 16 or more processors on a desktop PC? I can imagine that an application could make use of one or two of them at a time and that you could run multiple apps at the same time all performing perfectly. But is there really anything that we need to do on desktop computers today, that would really make use of a multi core system? Games would probably be able to make the best use of them. In short, I have a solution. but I need a problem to test it with. finding prime numbers is really just getting boring. What could this stuff be used for in real life? Gineer
David B. Taylor wrote:
What would you really effectively do with 16 or more processors on a desktop PC?
If you had a large project that you needed to compile then 16 processors would be pretty handy :-D I remember someone a few weeks back talking about a 30-project solution in VS that took half an hour to compile so compiling that using 16 processors would significantly reduce the compile time :) Regards, --Perspx
"The Blue Screen of Death, also known as The Blue Screen of Doom, the "Blue Screen of Fun", "Phatul Exception: The WRECKening" and "Windows Vista", is a multi award-winning game first developed in 1995 by Microsoft" - Uncyclopedia Introduction to Object-Oriented JavaScript
-
I've always been interested in writing some really awesome parallel computing system using multiple cores on multiple machines on multiple network. Every time I spend time thinking of the solution and finding cool ways to make them work and overcome the intricacies... I always end up with not knowing what the problem for my solution is. What would you use this for? I mean, I know the obvious usage would be crunching large amounts of data for analysis for weather prediction or the like type stuff. These systems generally run on mainframe systems that are inherently multi core. Is that what we are talking about: Are these multi core systems always going to be servers. What would you really effectively do with 16 or more processors on a desktop PC? I can imagine that an application could make use of one or two of them at a time and that you could run multiple apps at the same time all performing perfectly. But is there really anything that we need to do on desktop computers today, that would really make use of a multi core system? Games would probably be able to make the best use of them. In short, I have a solution. but I need a problem to test it with. finding prime numbers is really just getting boring. What could this stuff be used for in real life? Gineer
The power consumption and heat emission of a classic processor is directly proportional to the square of it's frequency. The limit at which the disadvantages overcome the processing power gain is around 5 GHz. That's why we need multi-core CPU's with lower frequencies. The challenge is to maximize the degree in which a program can be run in parallel bits.
-
I've always been interested in writing some really awesome parallel computing system using multiple cores on multiple machines on multiple network. Every time I spend time thinking of the solution and finding cool ways to make them work and overcome the intricacies... I always end up with not knowing what the problem for my solution is. What would you use this for? I mean, I know the obvious usage would be crunching large amounts of data for analysis for weather prediction or the like type stuff. These systems generally run on mainframe systems that are inherently multi core. Is that what we are talking about: Are these multi core systems always going to be servers. What would you really effectively do with 16 or more processors on a desktop PC? I can imagine that an application could make use of one or two of them at a time and that you could run multiple apps at the same time all performing perfectly. But is there really anything that we need to do on desktop computers today, that would really make use of a multi core system? Games would probably be able to make the best use of them. In short, I have a solution. but I need a problem to test it with. finding prime numbers is really just getting boring. What could this stuff be used for in real life? Gineer
Hello Gineer, you can use multithreading for everything. I installed win98 on a current pc and it boots within 4 seconds. Vista on the same hardware takes about 34 seconds. (Both only with drivers) When booting windows have a look at your harddisc led. it is no lit all the time. Why? Windows, and the way it is design, is build up on timeouts. many off them. Many Programs would be much faster. A program of mine, downloading, sorting, running SpamAssassin on and send mails increased the speed up 10time calling SpamAssassin parallel. I think the future will be multicores (see dualcore and now quadcore). faster cpus (MHz) are too expensiv to build. So I see a pc in 5 years with a 16core cpu? Stefan
-
Hello Gineer, you can use multithreading for everything. I installed win98 on a current pc and it boots within 4 seconds. Vista on the same hardware takes about 34 seconds. (Both only with drivers) When booting windows have a look at your harddisc led. it is no lit all the time. Why? Windows, and the way it is design, is build up on timeouts. many off them. Many Programs would be much faster. A program of mine, downloading, sorting, running SpamAssassin on and send mails increased the speed up 10time calling SpamAssassin parallel. I think the future will be multicores (see dualcore and now quadcore). faster cpus (MHz) are too expensiv to build. So I see a pc in 5 years with a 16core cpu? Stefan
I do agree with that. But is that all we are after... speed? Take a look at the amount of time in a 24 hour cycle that your CPU is idle. We have these masses of Processing power available to us, but do we really make use of it? That's the point behind my original post. Yes, by no means am I saying multi core systems are bad. I'll have a 16 core system on my desk running visual studio and word any day. I just always think that there must be so much more that can be done with a standard desktop PC.... but what? I just can not get to that "What". Gineer
-
I do agree with that. But is that all we are after... speed? Take a look at the amount of time in a 24 hour cycle that your CPU is idle. We have these masses of Processing power available to us, but do we really make use of it? That's the point behind my original post. Yes, by no means am I saying multi core systems are bad. I'll have a 16 core system on my desk running visual studio and word any day. I just always think that there must be so much more that can be done with a standard desktop PC.... but what? I just can not get to that "What". Gineer
The main Problem is, in my opinion, the quality of software in relationship to hardwarepower. Why should I program well and efficient, using only the ammount of memory I need, when there is enaugh? On an Amiga 500, you needed each KByte. Today: "hmm.. not sure how large buffer need to be... so I take 100MB to be sure". This counts for MS too :-) How can it be that an actual OS is not faster as the amiga OS? stefan